Planet Fashion
Join the community
Methodology
The full scoring framework behind the Planet Fashion Score — every category, every weight, and how confidence in the underlying evidence changes the number.
A framework for scoring the environmental and social impact of fashion brands, manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers.
Methodology version: 1.0 (draft for public comment) · Last updated: 11 July 2026
The aim of this Standard is to provide an objective, transparent and evidence-based method for evaluating fashion organisations and the garments they produce. Rather than assigning a single opaque "sustainability score," Planet Fashion assesses two separate things — a specific product and the organisation behind it — across weighted categories, so that consumers can see exactly where a score comes from and where it doesn't apply.
The output is called the Planet Fashion Score — a category breakdown backed by a single headline grade, the same way a nutrition label pairs a front-of-pack traffic light with a back-of-pack ingredients table.
How Scoring Works
Two scores, not one
The Product Score describes a specific garment — what it's made from, how durable it is, whether it can be recycled. It's fixed at the point of manufacture and doesn't change unless the product itself changes.
The Organisation Score describes the company behind it — labour standards, factory transparency, water and carbon management, business model. It applies to the whole organisation, changes as the company's practices change, and is what appears on an organisation's Community profile.
A garment listing can show both — its own Product Score plus the Organisation Score of the brand or manufacturer that made it — but the two are never averaged into a single number. Collapsing "what it's made of" and "how the company behaves" into one figure is exactly the kind of opacity this Standard exists to replace.
The Planet Fashion Grade
Each score (Product or Organisation) rolls up to a headline grade, shown alongside — never instead of — the full category breakdown:
| Weighted Score | Grade |
|---|---|
| 90–100 | A |
| 75–89 | B |
| 60–74 | C |
| 40–59 | D |
| 20–39 | E |
| 0–19 | F |
| Insufficient data | Not yet assessed |
An organisation or product needs disclosed evidence in at least 80% of a score's weighted categories before a grade is published. Below that threshold it's marked "Not yet assessed" rather than penalised to zero — an absent grade is a different signal to consumers than a failing one.
Confidence-weighted scoring
Every metric is assessed against a confidence level, and that confidence level caps how much the raw score can count:
| Confidence Level | Meaning | Effect on score |
|---|---|---|
| Verified | Independently audited or certified by a recognised third party | Counts in full — no cap |
| Verified (Documentary Evidence) | Supported by public, checkable documents (e.g. published factory list) but not third-party audited | Counts in full, capped at 90 |
| Partially Verified | Some independent evidence exists but doesn't cover the full claim | Raw score averaged with a 70-cap |
| Self-reported | Claimed by the organisation with no supporting evidence | Capped at 70 regardless of the underlying figure |
| Unknown | No public information available | Scored as 0 for that metric and flagged "Not disclosed" in the breakdown |
This prevents a brand's own marketing claims from scoring identically to an independently audited fact — a self-reported "100% organic cotton" and a GOTS-certified "100% organic cotton" are not the same claim, and shouldn't produce the same score.
Weighting when a category doesn't apply
Some categories are conditional — Animal Welfare only applies to organisations using animal-derived fibres, for example. When a category is genuinely not applicable (not just undisclosed), its weight is redistributed proportionally across the remaining categories in that score, and the published breakdown is flagged "Partial assessment — N/A: [category]." Not-applicable is a different state to unknown, and both are different again from zero, and the published output must say which one it is.
Assessment dates & methodology versioning
Every published score carries the date it was last assessed and the methodology version it was assessed against. Organisation Scores are re-assessed at least annually, or immediately on credible evidence of a material change (a factory fire, a labour rights investigation, a certification lapsing). Product Scores are re-assessed only if the product specification changes. When the methodology itself changes version, previously published scores are re-run against the new version before the new version goes live, so grades never silently shift underneath an unchanged product or unchanged company behaviour.
Corrections & appeals
Any organisation being assessed can dispute a score by submitting supporting evidence through a documented correction channel. Disputes are logged publicly with the date raised and the date resolved, whether or not the score changes. Planet Fashion does not accept payment, sponsorship, or in-kind consideration from an organisation being scored, and does not offer any mechanism to expedite or improve a score outside this evidence-based process. This is a hard rule, not a stated intention — a rating body that can be paid to rate you higher isn't a rating body.
Part One: The Product Score
Applies to a specific garment or product line. Weights sum to 100%.
1. Fibre & Material Composition — Weight: 30%
What the garment is physically made from. The largest single weighting in the Product Score, reflecting Planet Fashion's core focus.
Natural Fibre Score
| Natural Fibre % | Score |
|---|---|
| 100% | 100 |
| 95–99% | 90 |
| 90–94% | 80 |
| 80–89% | 65 |
| 60–79% | 45 |
| 40–59% | 25 |
| <40% | 0 |
Organic Fibre Content
- 100% certified organic / Partially organic / None / Unknown
Plastic Fibre Content
Record percentage by weight for: polyester, recycled polyester, nylon, acrylic, elastane/spandex/lycra, polyamide, polypropylene, PVC.
Recycled synthetics stance: recycled polyester and nylon still shed microplastics and still count as plastic fibre content for the purposes of this score. They score better than virgin synthetics under Circularity (Part One, Section 6) for diverting waste from landfill, but they do not receive credit under Fibre & Material Composition — the fibre is still plastic at the point it touches skin and water. This is a deliberate, documented position, not an oversight.
Blend Complexity
A single-fibre garment (100% cotton, 100% wool) is inherently more repairable and recyclable than a multi-fibre blend, independent of what the blend is made from. Score a Blend Complexity Penalty based on number of distinct fibre types present above a 5% threshold — this applies even to all-natural blends, since fibre-to-fibre separation is the actual constraint, not fibre origin.
Artificial Cellulosic Fibres
Not plastics, but with distinct environmental considerations: Lyocell (TENCEL™), Modal, Viscose/Rayon, Cupro, Acetate. Record closed-loop vs open-loop production process where known.
Animal Fibres
Wool, alpaca, cashmere, silk, down, leather. Record animal welfare certification and traceability — these feed Animal Welfare in the Organisation Score rather than being double-counted here.
2. Fibre Source & Traceability — Weight: 15%
How well materials can be traced back to their origin.
- Country of origin disclosed / Farm identified / Full supply-chain traceability / Blockchain traceability / Unknown origin
- Organic certification · Regenerative farming · Fairtrade certification · Rain-fed vs irrigated crops
3. Chemical Safety — Weight: 15%
Dyes
Natural dyes / Low-impact dyes / Conventional dyes / Unknown
Fabric Finishes
Wrinkle resistant, stain resistant, water repellent, flame retardant, anti-odour, anti-microbial — record which are present, since finishes are a primary vector for the chemicals below.
PFAS & Forever Chemicals
Given equal billing with plastic fibre content, not folded into a general chemical-standards checklist — eliminating "plastic & forever chemicals" is the organisation's stated mission.
- PFAS testing performed (Y/N) and by whom
- Testing method / detection threshold used
- Confirmed PFAS-free (durable water repellents, membranes, coatings)
- Fluorine-free DWR alternative used, and which one
- Historical PFAS use disclosed where a switch has been made
Other Chemical Standards
Formaldehyde-free · Azo dye-free · Heavy-metal-free · OEKO-TEX® Standard 100 certified · bluesign® approved · ZDHC compliance
4. Microplastic Pollution — Weight: 10%
Distinct from plastic fibre content (scored under Section 1) — this measures shedding behaviour, which varies by weave, finish and fibre construction even at a fixed plastic percentage.
- Fibre shedding test performed, and by whom (independent lab vs manufacturer)
- Estimated wash emissions (fibres per kg fabric per wash, where tested)
- Shedding-reduction technologies applied (tighter weave, coatings, etc.)
5. Product Longevity — Weight: 15%
How long a garment is designed to last.
- Fabric durability · Stitch quality · Abrasion resistance · Colour fastness
- Repairability (spare buttons provided, repair guide available, ease of alteration)
- Repair service offered by manufacturer/retailer
- Warranty length
6. Circularity & End-of-Life — Weight: 10%
What happens to the garment after its usable life, and how it re-enters supply.
- Mono-material construction (cross-referenced with Blend Complexity, Section 1)
- Recyclable materials · Fibre-to-fibre recyclability
- Home compostability / industrial compostability, where applicable
- Take-back scheme · Repair programme · Resale programme · Rental options · Upcycling initiatives
- Recycled-content credit (see Recycled Synthetics stance, Section 1)
7. Consumer Information & Labelling — Weight: 5%
What's disclosed to the person buying the garment, at point of sale.
- Full fibre composition · Fabric weight (GSM) · Care instructions
- Repair guidance · End-of-life guidance · Country of manufacture
Product Score — Weight Summary
| Category | Weight |
|---|---|
| Fibre & Material Composition | 30% |
| Fibre Source & Traceability | 15% |
| Chemical Safety (incl. PFAS) | 15% |
| Microplastic Pollution | 10% |
| Product Longevity | 15% |
| Circularity & End-of-Life | 10% |
| Consumer Information & Labelling | 5% |
Part Two: The Organisation Score
Applies to the company as a whole — manufacturer, wholesaler, retailer or brand. Weights sum to 100% and are adjusted by organisation type (see below).
1. Manufacturing, Labour & Working Conditions — Weight: 25%
Factory Transparency
Factory disclosed / Region disclosed / Unknown
Labour Standards
Living wage (benchmarked against an independent living-wage coalition figure for the region, not the local legal minimum) · Minimum wage only · Third-party audited · SA8000 certified · Sedex member · Fair Wear Foundation participation
Working Conditions
Working hours · Overtime policy · Health & safety audits · Child labour policy · Forced labour policy · Freedom of association
2. Worker Wellbeing — Weight: 10%
- Living wage verification (cross-referenced with Section 1)
- Gender equality · Diversity programmes · Worker grievance mechanisms
- Healthcare access · Education programmes · Profit sharing · Long-term employment
3. Water Impact — Weight: 8%
- Water consumption per kg of fabric · Water recycling · Wastewater treatment
- Closed-loop water systems · Water pollution monitoring
4. Energy & Carbon — Weight: 8%
- Renewable energy percentage · Carbon emissions per garment
- Science-based targets · Carbon neutrality claims (and whether offset-based or reduction-based) · Verified emissions reporting
5. Animal Welfare — Weight: 4% (where applicable)
Not applicable to organisations using no animal-derived fibres — see Weighting when a category doesn't apply, above.
- Responsible Wool Standard · Responsible Down Standard · Leather Working Group
- No live-plucking · No mulesing · Animal traceability
6. Packaging & Logistics — Weight: 10%
Merges packaging and shipping — both are downstream distribution decisions under the same operational control.
Packaging
Plastic-free · Recycled paper · FSC-certified paper · Soy inks · Compostable mailers · Minimal packaging · Polybags (and whether recycled content)
Shipping
Air freight percentage · Sea freight percentage · Local/regional production · Consolidated shipping · Carbon reporting on logistics specifically
7. Transparency & Certifications — Weight: 20%
The single highest-weighted Organisation category, reflecting that everything else in this Standard depends on organisations disclosing information in the first place.
Disclosure
Factory list published · Supplier list published · Sustainability report published · Material traceability disclosed · Environmental targets published · Annual progress reporting against those targets
Certifications
Certifications are scored individually against what they actually verify, not treated as interchangeable "green" labels:
| Certification | Verification Tier | Primarily verifies |
|---|---|---|
| B Corp | Gold — whole-company audit | Overall governance, environmental & social impact |
| GOTS | Gold — third-party audited | Organic fibre content + processing + social criteria |
| Fair Wear Foundation | Gold — third-party audited | Labour conditions, factory-level |
| SA8000 | Gold — third-party audited | Labour conditions, factory-level |
| bluesign® | Gold — third-party audited | Chemical & environmental process management |
| Cradle to Cradle Certified® | Gold — third-party audited | Material health, circularity, social fairness (multi-criteria) |
| Fairtrade | Silver — third-party audited | Farm-level labour and price fairness |
| Leather Working Group | Silver — third-party audited | Tannery environmental practices only |
| Responsible Wool / Down Standard | Silver — third-party audited | Animal welfare + traceability only |
| OEKO-TEX® Standard 100 | Bronze — product-level testing | Chemical safety of the finished product, not process or labour |
| Sedex membership | Bronze — self-reported registry | Membership only; audit depth varies by member |
Gold-tier certifications lift the relevant metric to Verified confidence automatically; Silver lifts to Verified (Documentary Evidence); Bronze lifts to Partially Verified. This is what connects the certifications table to the confidence-weighted scoring mechanic above, rather than certifications sitting as a disconnected checklist.
8. Business Model, Scale & Production Volume — Weight: 15%
The category most directly aimed at greenwashing: a company can score well on every category above while a "sustainable capsule" covers 2% of what it actually ships.
- Fast fashion / slow fashion / made-to-order / small-batch production
- Overstock management · deadstock fabric use
- Production coverage: what percentage of the organisation's total production volume is covered by the practices claimed elsewhere in this score (not just the flagship or marketed line)
- Unsold inventory policy: destruction of unsold stock (disclosed/prohibited/unknown) vs. discounting, donation, or resale
Organisation Score — Weight Summary
| Category | Weight |
|---|---|
| Manufacturing, Labour & Working Conditions | 25% |
| Transparency & Certifications | 20% |
| Business Model, Scale & Production Volume | 15% |
| Worker Wellbeing | 10% |
| Packaging & Logistics | 10% |
| Water Impact | 8% |
| Energy & Carbon | 8% |
| Animal Welfare (where applicable) | 4% |
Organisation-Type Weighting
The Organisation Score weights above are the default (roughly representative of a vertically integrated brand). For organisations that only control part of the supply chain, weight is shifted toward the categories they actually influence — an organisation is not scored on decisions it has no power over, but it is scored on whether it discloses and audits the decisions made upstream of it.
Manufacturers
Weight shifted toward: Manufacturing, Labour & Working Conditions · Water Impact · Energy & Carbon · Worker Wellbeing.
Wholesalers
Weight shifted toward: Transparency & Certifications · Supplier due diligence (scored within Manufacturing, Labour & Working Conditions as a disclosure metric) · Packaging & Logistics.
Retailers / Resellers
Weight shifted toward: Transparency & Certifications · Business Model, Scale & Production Volume · Packaging & Logistics · Product-level Consumer Information (Part One, Section 7, aggregated across the retailer's range).
Planet Fashion Principles
The methodology is:
- Transparent and publicly documented
- Evidence-based, with confidence levels attached to every metric
- Independently reviewable
- Free from pay-to-play — no organisation can purchase a better score
- Continuously updated, with versioned methodology and re-run historical scores
- Technology-neutral
- Comparable across brands within the same organisation type
Future Metrics
The framework could evolve to include:
Biodiversity
Habitat impact · Pollinator impact · Deforestation risk
Soil Health
Regenerative farming · Soil carbon · Crop rotation
Water Risk
Water-stressed growing regions · Irrigation dependence
Climate Adaptation
Supply chain resilience · Climate risk disclosure
Digital Product Passport Readiness
Product traceability · QR-linked lifecycle data · Repair history · Material provenance
Vision
Planet Fashion should become the equivalent of an independent product nutrition label for clothing, and an independent conduct rating for the companies that make it.
Instead of asking:
"Is this brand sustainable?"
Consumers should be able to answer, with a source and a confidence level attached to each answer:
- What is this garment made from, and how confident is that claim?
- How much plastic does it contain, and does that include what's recycled?
- Where did the fibres come from?
- What chemicals — including PFAS — were used?
- Were workers treated fairly, across how much of the company's actual production?
- How durable is it, and can it be repaired?
- Can it be recycled, and by what process?
- How transparent is the company, and has it ever disputed a score?
This approach moves fashion sustainability from marketing claims to measurable, evidence-based, continuously re-verified comparisons.