Good On You uses only publicly available information to inform ratings. That’s because disclosure and transparency are essential to meaningful and verifiable industry progress. This article covers the publicly available data sources we consider when rating brands.
Brand and parent company reporting
The rating system takes into account information from a brand and its parent company’s publications, including websites, annual reporting, and sustainability reporting. We only consider information that is specific, precise, and relevant. That’s important as it ensures Good On You’s ratings aren’t influenced by common types of greenwashing, which are typically ambiguous, vague, inaccurate, or immaterial.
We consider a brand’s website (including sustainability reports or other published PDFs linked from the website) as the primary source for disclosures, as consumers have a right to know this information as they are shopping. This information should be easily visible and accessible to consumers and other stakeholders when they land on a brand’s website.
In certain cases, a link to an external third party might be more relevant, such as a brand's CDP questionnaire. Check the third-party guidance below for specific information types.
Specific and tangible language in disclosures
In general, public disclosures should be specific and provide tangible actions and evidence. For example, brands shouldn't say something like “our suppliers recycle offcuts where possible”, as it’s vague and imprecise. Rather, they should share specific facts such as “40% of offcuts were reused and 30% recycled”.
For small brands with limited resources, Good On You has assembled this guide with tips on improving sustainability communications.
Third-party reports and indices
The rating system takes into account credible independent rankings of brands where they map to a significant subset of the issues we consider, including the CDP Climate Change and Water Security questionnaires.
From time to time, we become aware of significant issues that may impact a brand’s rating. Examples include investigations by credible civil society organisations such as the International Labour Rights Forum, Clean Clothes Campaign, Greenpeace, and the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. In these cases, we will initiate a review of the brand's rating. In most cases, reviews are completed within two months. Reports from credible third-party sources are also sought to assess certain negative impact issues such as environmental, labour, or animal welfare incidents.
Where information from relevant independent certifications and standards systems is publicly disclosed, those sources are taken into account.
See which certifications and standards are considered in the ratings methodologies.