This table explains the areas and issues that Good On You assesses when rating beauty brands, and the impact of these issues.
Note that our beauty ratings focus on how brands' policies and actions align with widely adopted best practices for sustainability, but they do not account for potential consumer health impacts.
Planet
Area | Issue | Description |
Resource use and circularity | Ingredients | Whether brands use ingredients with lower environmental impacts, such as certified organic or upcycled choices. We encourage brands to disclose the volume of lower impact ingredients used and provide details on their usage across all products. We also encourage them to disclose a full list of ingredients online using internationally recognised names. |
Packaging | Whether brands reduce packaging waste through more sustainable practices. We also consider refill and take-back models and the minimisation of packing through product design (solid bars, concentrated products). Top brands minimise packaging and use high levels of recycled and recyclable materials, showing measurable reductions. | |
Circularity | Circular practices involve reducing waste, conserving resources, and prioritising “closing the loop” throughout the value chain. We consider steps including sourcing upcycled ingredients, formulating multi-purpose products, and sizing products according to use frequency and expiration to avoid waste. | |
Business model | How a brand's business model influences its environmental impact. Fast beauty is characterised by mass sales, lower price points, and regular new arrivals. Even brands with lower-impact products can harm the environment by promoting overconsumption through trend-driven marketing. | |
Biodiversity | How brands avoid or minimise impact on biodiversity in their supply chain. Brands are expected to have sourcing strategies centred on restoring nature, conserving impacted species, promoting sustainable agriculture, and protecting soil and waterways. | |
Commodity sourcing | How brands source key agricultural commodities: palm oil, soy, coconut, cocoa, shea, vanilla, and sugarcane, which can cause deforestation and ecological damage. A traceable supply chain and a comprehensive sourcing policy, supported by credible certifications such as RSPO or RTRS, helps brands demonstrate a commitment to responsibly sourcing these commodities. | |
Climate change | Measuring emissions | Whether and how brands measure greenhouse gas emissions across their direct operations and value chain, taking into account any relevant certifications. Brands are expected to identify and measure the emissions that have the largest impact in their supply chain. Brands are also expected to collect primary data from their suppliers for more accurate emissions figures. |
Emissions reduction initiatives | The steps brands have taken to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, taking into account any relevant certifications. We look at where in the value chain the emissions reductions occur, with a particularly strong focus on the supply chain. Making products by hand, avoiding petrochemical-derived ingredients, using renewable energy, manufacturing locally, and using energy efficiency projects are some of the actions that brands can take to reduce their climate impact. | |
Emissions reduction target | Brands’ greenhouse gas emission reduction targets, taking into account any relevant certifications. We reward brands that set ambitious targets that cover their direct operations and particularly their supply chain. Brands are rewarded for setting Science-Based Targets. | |
Ecotoxicity | Ecotoxicity policy | Whether brands have a documented policy or strategy in place to assess the ecotoxicity and biodegradability of their ingredients. |
Suncare products | Some chemical UV filters, nanoparticles and parabens are recognised as chemicals that pose a threat to the ecosystem health of oceans, rivers and freshwater streams. We expect brands to demonstrate efforts to exclude these known pollutants from their suncare products. | |
Microplastics | Microplastics are found in various beauty products, including cleansers, moisturisers, and makeup. Synthetic glitter, which is commonly made from layers of plastic (PET) and metal, can also be found in makeup products. Our methodology explores the efforts brands make to minimise the impact of microplastics. | |
Water | Water-stressed basins | Brands’ impact on water use across the supply chain. Water issues manifest themselves at a local water basin level. Brands are expected to trace their suppliers and determine whether they are operating in water basins with high levels of water stress. |
Stakeholder engagement | How brands engage with stakeholders to manage water issues in the value chain. Brands are expected to engage with their suppliers and other key stakeholders, particularly in water basins with higher levels of water stress. | |
Water target | Brands’ targets for reducing water use across their supply chain. | |
Water and wastewater initiatives | Brands’ initiatives to reduce water use across the supply chain, taking into account any relevant certifications. Specifically, water initiatives where there are higher levels of water use such as the manufacturing stage and the raw material stage. How brands manage wastewater and treat effluent across the supply chain, taking into account any relevant certifications. | |
Measuring water and wastewater | How brands measure water use and wastewater across the supply chain, taking into account any relevant certifications | |
Citizenship | Citizenship | The actions brands take as corporate citizens to address environmental harm related to beauty including innovation, advocacy, and remediation of negative incidents. |
People
Area | Issue | Description |
Supply chain risk | Traceability | The extent to which brands are able to trace suppliers. Brands are expected to trace beyond just the final production stage and include primary and secondary suppliers to best manage their impact and ensure workers’ rights. |
Transparency | How transparent brands are about their suppliers across the full supply chain, including whether they publish details such as the country of manufacture, supplier names and contacts, number of employees, and raw fabrics used. | |
Labour rights and abuse risks | How brands’ choice of supplier location and industry standards impacts the risk of labour rights abuse in the supply chain. | |
Policies | Code of conduct | Labour policies covered in the supplier code of conduct, taking into account any relevant certifications. At a minimum, brands should have a code of conduct that covers all of their supply chain and includes the ILO Principles. |
Modern slavery | The actions brands take to avoid modern slavery across the supply chain, taking into account any relevant certifications. | |
Financial security | Whether brands ensure financial security for their suppliers, which helps avoid poor working conditions and wages in the supply chain. Long-term contracts offer suppliers stable, predictable income, enabling investment in their workforce. | |
Gender, diversity, and inclusion | The diversity and inclusion policies and practices, both in direct operations and across the supply chain. This includes brands’ approach to discrimination on the basis of race, gender, age, sexuality, ability, and socioeconomic status. We expect brands to demonstrate the mechanisms and tools to ensure that their policy is met, with particular weighting to brands that demonstrate tangible results as an outcome from those mechanisms. | |
Sandblasting | Whether brands offer distressed denim, and if they do, their approach to sandblasting. | |
Assurance | Worker empowerment | How brands support the right to freedom of association and other ways to empower workers across the supply chain. We also evaluate what proportion of workers are members of collective bargaining groups or unions, and how the brand engages with those groups to ensure stronger worker outcomes. |
Auditing | Any relevant certifications and what proportion of the supply chain is covered. Social auditing is designed to ensure that the policies and standards brands expect of their suppliers are adhered to. | |
Supplier relationships | How brands support suppliers to avoid labour rights abuses and to promote respect for workers and fair wages. We look for brands that may be partnering with artisans or independent makers, and ensure that the brand and workers have a balanced and equal working relationship. We also look at brands that may be set up with an explicit purpose to engage with underrepresented workers and communities. | |
Grievance mechanism | The formal processes implemented for workers in the supply chain to raise complaints, harassment, or other issues related to their working conditions and rights. | |
Living wage | Methodology | How brands calculate living wages for workers across the supply chain, taking into account any relevant certifications. |
Outcomes | The extent to which brands ensure payment of a living wage to workers across their supply chain, taking into account any relevant certifications. | |
Collaboration | Multi-stakeholder initiative | Cross-industry initiatives to address labour rights that brands are actively involved in. |
Citizenship | Positive citizenship | The actions brands take as corporate citizens to address labour rights issues including advocacy record, response to COVID-19, remediation for any harm caused, and efforts to avoid sourcing from regions with high risk of human rights abuses. |
Negative citizenship | ||
Supply chain risk | Traceability | The extent to which brands are able to trace suppliers. Brands are expected to trace beyond just the final production stage and include primary and secondary suppliers to best manage their impact and ensure workers’ rights. |
Transparency | How transparent brands are about their suppliers across the full supply chain, including whether they publish details such as the country of manufacture, supplier names and contacts, number of employees, and raw ingredients used. | |
Labour rights and abuse risks | How brands’ choice of supplier location and industry standards impacts the risk of labour rights abuse in the supply chain. | |
Commodity sourcing | How brands address labour rights in sourcing agricultural and mined commodities: palm oil, soy, coconut, cocoa, shea, vanilla, mica, and sugarcane. Brands are assessed on their sourcing policies, supply chain traceability, supplier engagement, and adherence to best practices. | |
Policies | Code of conduct | Labour policies covered in the supplier code of conduct, taking into account any relevant certifications. At a minimum, brands should have a code of conduct that covers all of their supply chain and includes the ILO Principles. |
Financial security | Whether brands ensure financial security for their suppliers, which helps avoid poor working conditions and wages in the supply chain. Long-term contracts offer suppliers stable, predictable income, enabling investment in their workforce. | |
Modern slavery | The actions brands take to avoid modern slavery across the supply chain, taking into account any relevant certifications. | |
Gender, diversity, and inclusion | The diversity and inclusion policies and practices, both in direct operations and across the supply chain. This includes brands’ approach to discrimination on the basis of race, gender, age, sexuality, ability, and socioeconomic status. We expect brands to demonstrate the mechanisms and tools to ensure that their policy is met, with particular weighting to brands that demonstrate tangible results as an outcome of those mechanisms. | |
Assurance | Worker empowerment | How brands support the right to freedom of association and other ways to empower workers across the supply chain. We also evaluate what proportion of workers are members of collective bargaining groups or unions, and how the brand engages with those groups to ensure stronger worker outcomes. |
Auditing | Any relevant certifications and what proportion of the supply chain is covered. Social auditing is designed to ensure that the policies and standards brands expect of their suppliers are adhered to. | |
Supplier relationships | How brands support suppliers to avoid labour rights abuses and promote respect for workers and fair wages. We look for brands that ensure the brand and workers have a balanced and equal working relationship. We also look at brands that may be set up with an explicit purpose to engage with underrepresented workers and communities. | |
Living wage | Living wage methodology | How brands calculate living wages for workers across the supply chain, taking into account any relevant certifications. |
Living wage projects | The extent to which brands ensure payment of a living wage to workers across their supply chain, taking into account any relevant certifications. | |
Collaboration | Multi-stakeholder initiatives | Cross-industry initiatives to address labour rights that brands are actively involved in. |
Citizenship | Citizenship | The actions brands take as corporate citizens to address labour rights issues including advocacy record, response to COVID-19, remediation for any harm caused, and efforts to avoid sourcing from regions with high risk of human rights abuses. |
Animals
Area | Issue | Description |
Animal-derived ingredients | Ingredients | If brands make products that include animal-derived ingredients. For vegan brands, we look for certification by PETA or the Vegan Society. |
Farmed animals | How brands source animal-derived ingredients, specifically from farmed animals like sheep and cows, such as lanolin, collagen, and milk products. Brands are evaluated based on their use of animal ingredients and adherence to animal welfare certifications. | |
Wild animals | Whether brands source ingredients from wild animals. The use of exotic or non-domesticated animal ingredients in beauty products is discouraged, and brands that do so receive lower scores. | |
Animal welfare and commitments | Animal testing | Despite global bans in 44 countries and consensus on its unnecessary nature, some markets still require animal testing for regulatory approval. Brands navigating these regulations are expected to uphold cruelty-free practices and actively oppose animal testing in their supply chains. Better brands provide clear, certified assurances that neither ingredients nor finished products have been tested on animals, and are free from any association with parent companies that conduct animal testing. |
Commitment to elimination | ||
Citizenship | Citizenship | Brands’ work to advocate for better outcomes for animals in beauty and to respond to incidents in the supply chain. |