logo
Shein's Climate Ambitions Have Been Validated. Now What?

Shein's Climate Ambitions Have Been Validated. Now What?

Yahoo2 days ago

'I am dubious,' Kenneth Pucker wrote—succinctly and pointedly—on LinkedIn on Tuesday.
The Fletcher School at Tufts University professor of the practice was expressing his feelings about Shein, which revealed the same day that it had attained a 'milestone' in its 'climate journey' following the Science Based Targets initiative's validation of its goal to reach net-zero greenhouse gas emissions across its entire value chain by 2050. This means it would remove more carbon dioxide from the air than it would release.
More from Sourcing Journal
EU Watchdog Says Shein Violated Bloc's Consumer Laws
H&M Foundation's 10 Global Change Award Winners Have One Thing in Common
Who Benefited From Shein, Temu Troubles?
The Chinese-founded e-tail Goliath said it will achieve this through a 'decarbonization roadmap,' developed with advisory firm Anthesis Group, to reduce its absolute Scope 1 and 2 emissions—that is, those produced directly by Shein and the energy it purchases—by 42 percent and its absolute Scope 3 emissions—those produced by its suppliers—by 25 percent by 2030. Steps will include deploying only renewable energy at all directly managed facilities, phasing out fossil fuels in its operations by transitioning to electric vehicles, minimizing the adoption of virgin materials and cutting transportation distances by ramping up local procurement and optimizing logistical routes.
'SBTi's validation of our net-zero targets marks an important step in Shein's decarbonization journey,' Mustan Lalani, a Tetra Pak vet who joined the Singapore-headquartered company as its global head of sustainability in January, said in a statement. 'We are committed to reducing emissions across our value chain and recognize that addressing Scope 3 emissions is a complex but critical part of that effort. As we continue this work, we will build on our momentum and adapt our approach in line with evolving technologies, policies and industry best practices.'
But Shein's planet-warming emissions have never declined year over year, Pucker noted. They have, in fact, nearly tripled over the past three years. In 2023, the Temu nemesis' carbon footprint swelled to 16.7 million metric tons of carbon dioxide, up 45 percent from the previous year and 175 percent from the year before that. The number outlaps not only the 16.4 million metric tons in emissions produced by Zara owner Inditex, fashion's previous top polluter, but also those of several countries. It wouldn't be hyperbole to say that Shein is the industry's biggest environmental offender.
At best, Shein's plans are misleading because they focus on Scope 1 and 2 targets that account for less than 0.5 percent of its total emissions, said Rachel Kitchin, senior corporate climate campaigner at Stand.earth, a Canadian watchdog group that ranks the ultra-fast-fashion purveyor last in its Fossil-Free Fashion Scorecard. At worst, its proposal is unattainable without severe changes to its production and distribution model, which is heavily reliant on coal-stoked power generation, high production volumes and extensive air freight, she said.
'We need to see Shein commit to concrete targets—with a goal to phase out on-site coal by 2030 and transition to renewable energy across supply chains—to take this plan seriously,' she said. 'Until the company stops flying millions of small packages around the world, commits to phasing out coal and actively supports a transition to renewable energy across its supply chain, we're deeply skeptical that this announcement is anything more than PR.'
It's perhaps also worth noting that SBTi doesn't probe deeply into a company's underlying business model when reviewing a target, said Michael Sadowski, a climate and sustainability consultant and former Nike director of sustainable business and innovation. What the nonprofit looks at is the data shared voluntarily during target submissions to ensure that it meets the SBTi criteria.
'I don't have any inside info on Shein, and so observing their astronomical growth over the last decade, coupled with their business model, makes me question how they will reduce scope 3 emissions by 25 percent by 2030,' he said. 'I would like to see a detailed plan for how they will achieve this: Will they not ship individual packages by air? Will they fund renewable energy at suppliers or commit to long-term supplier relationships so these partners can invest in renewable energy? Will they invest in fuel switching at mills?'
Sadowski said that fiber switching and 'supporting' manufacturers in transitioning to renewable energy alone won't help Shein reach 25 percent. He said he knows of only a 'small handful' of apparel and footwear brands that have reduced Scope 3 emissions on an absolute basis. They have done so only by investing a lot of money in manufacturers with which they have maintained longstanding relationships.
Shein's announcement comes among rumors that it's pursuing a listing in Hong Kong after Chinese regulators, specifically the China Securities Regulatory Commission, failed to give it the go-ahead for a London IPO after Britain's Financial Conduct Authority greenlit the move. Unnamed sources told Reuters Wednesday that the company plans to go public in the special administrative region within the year. This would make it the third try at going public for Shein, which did not respond to a request for comment. Before its attempt in the United Kingdom, the Missguided owner was reportedly hoping for a New York debut. This was scuppered, it's been said, by a rare united front by Republican and Democratic lawmakers that threw conditions over concerns about China's influence and the potential forced labor of persecuted Muslim minorities.
The retail giant has also had to grapple with questions of trustworthiness. Just this week, national consumer authorities in Belgium, France, Ireland and the Netherlands joined the European Commission to ask Shein to fix practices on its platform that appear to flout EU consumer law, including what they say are 'giving false or deceptive information about the sustainability benefits of certain products.' In 2024, Italy's antitrust agency opened an investigation into a company that manages Shein's online presence in the country over possible greenwashing. Shein has said that it is ready to cooperate openly with authorities.
'If Shein delivers on its plan to grow approximately 25 percent over the near term, that would mean that the carbon intensity unit would have to fall by 85 percent to achieve their target,' said Pucker, still unconvinced. 'Will they achieve their plan?'
On the plus side, Shein's disclosure of SBTi-approved emissions reduction targets, when more than half of 250 major fashion brands fail to do so, is commendable in and of itself, said Liv Simpliciano, policy and research manager at Fashion Revolution, a grassroots organization that scores companies on their transparency—or lack thereof. But it's also what she calls the bare minimum. So far, Shein hasn't divulged its supplier list or annual production volumes, which activists say are necessary to verify brand claims and hold them to account. And by her estimation, only four brands—Asics, H&M Group, Marks & Spencer and Patagonia—have carbon reduction targets that meet the level of ambition that the Paris Agreement has determined will stave off the worst effects of climate change.
'That being said, targets are only as meaningful as the action that follows,' she said. 'The fashion industry remains far off track from delivering the rapid, large-scale emissions cuts that climate science makes unequivocally clear are needed. The polluter pays principle must apply: those with the largest footprints carry the greatest responsibility to act. Targets and ambition levels must match pollution levels.'
More than anything, Peter Ford, a decarbonization consultant who previously worked at H&M Group, thinks that Shein whiffed a chance to have reduction goals with real bite. He said that while all companies need to interrogate their carbon emissions and set targets to reduce them, it is especially imperative that any company whose Scope 3 emissions account for 'practically all of its existing contributions to global heating' set targets that are 'high enough to be impactful.'
'The announced targets for Shein are small, and not even close to aligning with current industry-standard goal of 50 percent reduction by 2030 that UNFCCC Fashion Charter signatories have committed to,' he said, using an acronym for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. 'Industry giants H&M Group and Inditex have SBTis that are even more ambitious, and I feel Shein has missed an opportunity to highlight that it clearly understands the role it currently plays in contributing to global heating—and demonstrate a commitment to meaningfully reduce it.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump says China 'totally violated' early trade agreement with the U.S.
Trump says China 'totally violated' early trade agreement with the U.S.

Yahoo

time29 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump says China 'totally violated' early trade agreement with the U.S.

President Donald Trump lambasted China again on Friday and claimed it 'totally violated' a trade agreement with the U.S. 'China, perhaps not surprisingly to some, HAS TOTALLY VIOLATED ITS AGREEMENT WITH US,' Trump said in Friday morning social media post. 'So much for being Mr. NICE GUY!' The remarks injected fresh uncertainty into the recent agreement between the U.S. and China that led to a 90-day suspension of triple-digit tariffs both countries had levied on each other. China has kept a 10% tariff on U.S. imports while the U.S. maintains a 30% tariff on Chinese goods. Stocks dropped after Trump's social media post. Negotiations on a sweeping agreement are still playing out, but whether or not the Trump administration strikes a deal remains to be seen. The legal backdrop is unsettled. A three-judge federal panel on Wednesday struck down the legal justification for Trump's 'Liberation Day' tariffs, threatening to unwind large portions of his trade agenda. A federal appeals court issued a temporary stay, allowing the tariffs to remain in place while it reviews the case. The administration now has until June 9 to make its arguments, with the White House vowing to escalate the battle all the way to the Supreme Court if needed. In an interview with Fox News (FOXA) on Friday, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent suggested that actual progress may hinge on a direct call between President Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping. 'Given the magnitude of the talks… this is going to require both leaders to weigh in,' he said. —Catherine Baab contributed to this article. For the latest news, Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.

VTRS FINAL DEADLINE: ROSEN, SKILLED INVESTOR COUNSEL, Encourages Viatris Inc. Investors with Losses in Excess of $100K to Secure Counsel Before Important June 3 Deadline in Securities Class Action
VTRS FINAL DEADLINE: ROSEN, SKILLED INVESTOR COUNSEL, Encourages Viatris Inc. Investors with Losses in Excess of $100K to Secure Counsel Before Important June 3 Deadline in Securities Class Action

Associated Press

time35 minutes ago

  • Associated Press

VTRS FINAL DEADLINE: ROSEN, SKILLED INVESTOR COUNSEL, Encourages Viatris Inc. Investors with Losses in Excess of $100K to Secure Counsel Before Important June 3 Deadline in Securities Class Action

New York, New York--(Newsfile Corp. - May 30, 2025) - WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, reminds purchasers of securities of Viatris Inc. (NASDAQ: VTRS) between August 8, 2024 and February 26, 2025, both dates inclusive (the 'Class Period'), of the important June 3, 2025 lead plaintiff deadline. SO WHAT: If you purchased Viatris securities during the Class Period you may be entitled to compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees or costs through a contingency fee arrangement. WHAT TO DO NEXT: To join the Viatris class action, go to call Phillip Kim, Esq. at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for more information. A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than June 3, 2025. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources, or any meaningful peer recognition. Many of these firms do not actually litigate securities class actions, but are merely middlemen that refer clients or partner with law firms that actually litigate the cases. Be wise in selecting counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm achieved the largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese Company at the time. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013 and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In 2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers. DETAILS OF THE CASE: According to the lawsuit, during the Class Period, defendants provided investors with material information concerning the failed inspection of Viatris' Indore, India facility. Defendants' statements, albeit made months after the initial inspection and defendants' initiation of remediation efforts included, among other things, the disclosure of the FDA's issuance of a warning letter and import alert which would prevent Viatris from shipping eleven products from the Indore facility, though four of such were exempt from the limitations (the 'Warning Letter'). Defendants routinely referred to the impact of the Warning Letter as a mere 'minor headwind' for Viatris. Further, defendants provided these disclosures to investors while, at the same time, disseminating materially false and misleading statements and/or concealing material adverse facts concerning the true state impact of the Warning Letter on Viatris' financials. Notably, defendants did not disclose precisely when the inspection occurred, how long the remediation efforts had been implemented, or the financial impact of the existing and continued remediation efforts. Defendants further notably failed to disclose which products were subject to the FDA Warning Letter, which products were subject to exemptions, and the significance of the restricted products with respect to Viatris' existing financials and future projections, and for which Viatris believed it would obtain exemptions. Such statements, absent these material facts, caused Plaintiff and other shareholders to purchase Viatris' securities at artificially inflated prices. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages. To join the Viatris class action, go to or call Phillip Kim, Esq. at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for more information. No Class Has Been Certified. Until a class is certified, you are not represented by counsel unless you retain one. You may select counsel of your choice. You may also remain an absent class member and do nothing at this point. An investor's ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff. Follow us for updates on LinkedIn: on Twitter: or on Facebook: Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. ------------------------------- Contact Information: Laurence Rosen, Esq. Phillip Kim, Esq. The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. 275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor New York, NY 10016 Tel: (212) 686-1060 Toll Free: (866) 767-3653 Fax: (212) 202-3827 [email protected] To view the source version of this press release, please visit

Tariffs: Does Trump need a backup plan amid legal pushback?
Tariffs: Does Trump need a backup plan amid legal pushback?

Yahoo

time39 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Tariffs: Does Trump need a backup plan amid legal pushback?

President Trump is claiming that China has "totally violated" its trade agreement, in a post on Truth Social after US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent commented that negotiations with Chinese trade officials have become "stalled." This all comes after Thursday's legal whiplash, where a US appeals court temporarily reinstated several of the administration's sweeping tariff policies after a US trade court ruled them to be illegal. Strategas Securities managing director of policy research Jeannette Lowe joins the Morning Brief team to share her perspective on the latest US-China tariff drama and what Trump's next step in his tariff strategy could look like. To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Morning Brief here. President Trump taking to truth social this morning claiming China violated its trade agreement with the US. It comes a day after Treasury Secretary Scott Beson says the stalled trade talks could warrant a call between President Trump and President Xi. Despite the 90-day pause on reciprocal tariffs that went into effect May 14th, tensions remain high. Here with more on the ongoing negotiations. We've got Jeannette Lo who is the strategist securities managing director of policy research here. I just want to get your reaction to the latest via social media this morning from Trump and and what that could entail kind of going into the weekend. Well, thank you for having me. I think one of the things that's interesting is that, you know, we had a court decision on Wednesday night overturning the authority for the president to impose tariffs using national emergencies. Then you did actually get to stay yesterday, and now here you have Trump pressuring China over its deal that they reached to lower tariffs from the really high rates of 125% down to 10% or 30% depending on which, uh, you know, terrace you're calculating at the time. But I think the point is is that Trump is also trying to pressure trade partners to show that he is still going to pursue this trade agenda of his even if there is some uncertainty that has been caused by the court decision earlier this week. And we've always been of the view that trade decisions are going to be a little bit different with China than the rest of the world. We think Trump is going to be much more hawkish with regard to China than he is with other countries, and this kind of plays into that where he is really trying to pressure China and show a little bit more stringency with them with regards to the tariffs and talking about the fact that they are not moving well in a particular direction to get a deal. But that was not necessarily a surprise. I think if we had seen a message like that coming from another country like Europe, which we saw last Friday, that would have been probably a different story. Yeah, I think that's a really great overview, and it's something that is interesting given the fact that we did have this appeal coming in overnight here. I I'm just curious, Jeanette, can you kind of lay the groundwork for where you see these tariffs heading at the current moment? Like did this ruling actually put any sort of bounds on the president's tariff policy in your view that are going to stay in place long term? Right. I think the main point is that it put, uh, it put a barrier on the president's ability to do it in an unbounded manner. That was kind of the word that was using used by the the Court of International Trade when they made their decision. So I think what's important here is that it makes it more difficult for Trump to impose more tariffs, but it doesn't take away his ability to do so. So the administration has a backup plan. Obviously, if the tariffs had to be removed immediately and the stay had not been granted, that would have caused a lot more disruption to the markets, put tariffs on, take them off, then they're probably going to go back on again. But I think what's important is we showed that we still have section 232, which is the way that the Trump administration is imposing tariffs on goods like steel, aluminum, autos, auto parts, potentially pharmaceuticals and semiconductors in the future. And then there's also these other, um, authorities. So we had section 301 that was used to impose tariffs on China in Trump's first term. That is still a tool that can be used to even increase tariffs on China quite quickly. Um, but then the Trump administration has other tools. There's a talk about whether or not he could put some tariffs in place at 15% for 150 days while they do investigations on a country by country basis to then impose other tariffs. That's kind of a clunky way to do this, but at the same time there's another method as well. There's section 338, which means that they could put tariffs in place. They only have to wait 30 days. They don't have to do an investigation, but they could impose tariffs up to 50%. So I think the larger message is that the tariffs are not necessarily going away. There's just probably even more uncertainty now about what comes next and when and when will this play out through the legal system, and do we keep the current tariffs in place or does the administration need to go to a backup plan?

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store