Patagonia

Pro­duc­ti­on locations -

• 88% in Asia – Viet­nam and Sri Lanka
• On-site solar ins­tal­la­ti­ons in the Uni­ted States
• Mexi­co and South America

Wor­king Con­di­ti­ons & living wages – 

Pata­go­nia stri­ves for soci­al equ­ality at work. Pata­go­nia cur­ren­tly has an almost 50 – 50 dis­tri­bu­ti­on betwe­en men and women at work. Last August, the com­pany sig­ned the Equ­al Pay Pled­ge, enco­ura­ging Ame­ri­can com­pa­ni­es to ensu­re the­ir employe­es rece­ive a fair wage.

Accor­ding to the Fair Tra­de Cer­ti­fi­ed sewn label, 88% of Pata­go­ni­a’s gar­ments are stit­c­hed in Asia, mainly in Viet­nam and Sri Lan­ka. This label guaran­te­es fair wages and dig­ni­fi­ed wor­king con­di­ti­ons. Unfor­tu­na­tely, the situ­ati­on on cot­ton plan­ta­ti­ons, in yarn spin­ning mil­ls and texti­le fac­to­ri­es is uncle­ar.

Pata­go­nia says that sin­ce 2020, living wages have been paid in 39% of the gar­ment fac­to­ri­es they work with. Unfor­tu­na­tely, this is not a high per­cen­ta­ge. Adding to this, a study by Fol­low The Money (FTM) reve­aled in June 2023 that Pata­go­nia also col­la­bo­ra­tes with ​‘fast-fashi­on fac­to­ri­es’. The report sta­ted that Pata­go­nia wor­ks with fac­to­ri­es that also pro­du­ce for big fast-fashi­on bran­ds such as ASOS and Pri­mark.

Accor­ding to FTM, wor­kers here are explo­ited and the fac­tory does not offer fair wages or safe wor­king con­di­ti­ons. Pata­go­nia says this col­la­bo­ra­ti­on is an advan­ta­ge, the brand wants to raise stan­dar­ds across the gar­ment indus­try by enga­ging with the­se fac­to­ri­es and intro­du­cing the­ir code of con­duct the­re. Unfor­tu­na­tely, by 2023, only 40 per cent of the gar­ment fac­to­ri­es in the­ir sup­ply cha­in are compliant.

Mate­ri­als -

Ple­ase note that this list does not reflect the enti­re mate­ri­ality of the brand. 

• Orga­nic Cotton
• Hemp
• Recy­cled PET bottles
• Recy­cled Wool
• Cel­lu­lo­sic fibres
• Span­dex
• Recy­cled TPU
• Bioba­sed polyester
• Polyes­ter
• Nylon

In 1994, Pata­go­nia was one of the first fashi­on com­pa­ni­es in the wor­ld to swit­ch all the­ir cot­ton items over to solem­nly using orga­nic cot­ton. This was quite revo­lu­ti­onary beca­use, at that time, the­re was hard­ly any orga­nic cot­ton ava­ila­ble. Pata­go­nia wor­ked very clo­sely with the­ir cot­ton far­mers to make the swit­ch hap­pen. Two years later, the brand had repla­ced all conven­ti­onal­ly grown cot­ton in its col­lec­ti­ons with orga­nic cotton.

The clot­hing brand has also been using hemp for a long time alre­ady. Hemp is a rare fibre in clot­hes, and Pata­go­nia was one of the first bran­ds to start using recy­cled PET bot­tles in the­ir out­do­or jac­kets and fle­ece swe­aters. The brand also recen­tly star­ted sel­ling knit­ted jum­pers made from recy­cled wool.

All this shows that Pata­go­nia was a revo­lu­ti­onary com­pany from the start and still is an ins­pi­ra­ti­on for many other com­pa­ni­es. All mate­ri­als they use are exten­si­vely rese­ar­c­hed and tes­ted for quality, fun­c­ti­ona­lity and envi­ron­men­tal impact.

Pata­go­nia aims to be CO2 neutral by 2025. By then, the brand only wants to use renewa­ble or recy­cled mate­ri­als, inclu­ding recy­cled polyes­ter and Econyl recy­cled nylon.

At COSH! we sup­port the use of recy­cled polyes­ter for out­do­or coats or bac­k­pac­ks. We think polyes­ter is not the best opti­on for gar­ments such as fle­ece and T‑shirts washed more often. This is beca­use of the micro­plas­tics that are rele­ased during washing. Find out more via this link.

Pata­go­nia (unfor­tu­na­tely) still uses polyes­ter for fle­eces and in some T‑shirts. If you buy clot­hing with polyes­ter, we advi­se you to use a Gup­py­fri­end during washing!

Pac­ka­ging -

Post-con­su­mer was­te (PCW) or recy­cled mate­ri­als cer­ti­fi­ed by the Forest Stewar­d­ship Coun­cil® (FSC) are uti­li­sed to make all of the bags, boxes, and paper mailers that are used to send e‑commerce pac­ka­ges. All of the pac­ka­ging is also recy­cla­ble, and more deta­ils can be found on the Pata­go­nia website.

Water usa­ge & chemicals -

Pata­go­nia has deta­iled met­ho­do­logy regar­ding the­ir water and che­mi­cal use, which is ava­ila­ble for the public to access. They aim to not only take care of the­ir water foot­print, but also to res­to­re river water in col­la­bo­ra­ti­on with non-pro­fit organisations.

Cir­cu­lar pro­duct design -

Pata­go­nia aims to design pro­duc­ts that last a long time and are easy to repa­ir. On the­ir web­si­te, you can find a repa­ir manu­al for your clot­hes and tips on exten­ding your gar­men­t’s life. In addi­ti­on, Pata­go­nia offers a so-cal­led Iron­clad Guaran­tee on all its pro­duc­ts. This is a life­ti­me guaran­tee that also inclu­des a (free) repa­ir ser­vi­ce. When you can no lon­ger use your Pata­go­nia pro­duct, you can send it to the brand for recy­cling.

Cir­cu­lar busi­ness models – 

In the past, the brand expli­ci­tly oppo­sed the dis­po­sa­ble cul­tu­re with the­ir adver­ti­sing cam­pa­ign ​‘Don’t buy this jac­ket’. Howe­ver, this cam­pa­ign led to more pur­c­ha­ses, oppo­si­te to the­ir messa­ge. A cle­ver mar­ke­ting ploy on the part of the com­pany. But we at COSH! think it’s gre­at that Pata­go­nia enco­ura­ges its cus­to­mers to take good care of the­ir out­do­or clot­hing and to pre­pa­re manu­als with cle­ar infor­ma­ti­on for this.

Dis­tan­ce & com­plexity of the sup­ply chain -

• USA
• Viet­nam
• Chi­na
• India
• Sri Lan­ka
• Ban­gla­desh
• Por­tu­gal

The sup­ply cha­in is hard to tra­ce as many inter­me­di­ari­es are invol­ved, and it is uncle­ar whe­re raw mate­ri­als are sour­ced. They offer a map showing the fac­to­ri­es, weaving, and spin­ning mil­ls. Over 60 con­trac­ted fac­to­ri­es do Patagonia’s manu­fac­tu­ring spre­ad over 16 coun­tri­es, inclu­ding the Uni­ted Sta­tes, Viet­nam, Chi­na, India, Sri Lan­ka, Ban­gla­desh, and Por­tu­gal, among others. The­re­fo­re the sup­ply cha­in is long. 

Tran­s­por­ta­ti­on –

The brand’s tran­s­por­ta­ti­on met­hods are uncle­ar, and dif­fi­cult to find infor­ma­ti­on abo­ut, howe­ver infor­ma­ti­on onli­ne tel­ls us that the brand uses an exter­nal tran­s­por­ta­ti­on com­pany. We can also con­clu­de that high tran­s­por­ta­ti­on emi­ssi­ons are una­vo­ida­ble due to the brand’s exten­si­ve sup­ply chain. 

• Wool
• Down

In 2015, Gre­en­pe­ace accu­sed Pata­go­nia of using toxic che­mi­cals in the­ir pro­duc­ts. A whi­le later, ani­mal rig­h­ts orga­ni­sa­ti­on PETA con­fron­ted the clot­hing brand with ani­mal-unfri­end­ly prac­ti­ces at an Argen­ti­ni­an she­ep farm, whe­re Pata­go­nia sour­ced its wool from.

As a result, Pata­go­nia stop­ped all coope­ra­ti­on with the she­ep indus­try and set up its own ​‘Res­pon­si­ble Wool and Down’ stan­dard (RSW label). This list of cri­te­ria deta­ils what stan­dar­ds pur­c­ha­sed wool or down must meet to guaran­tee ani­mal wel­fa­re. Seve­ral other com­pa­ni­es have alre­ady joined today, inclu­ding H&M and C&A.

Dut­ch news plat­form, ​‘One Wor­ld’, war­ns that it is too ear­ly to say whet­her the RSW label can guaran­tee ani­mal wel­fa­re. The ques­ti­on also rema­ins: how acce­ssi­ble is cer­ti­fi­ca­ti­on? Smal­ler bran­ds and she­ep far­mers often don’t have the money to be cer­ti­fi­ed des­pi­te tre­ating the ani­mals with respect.

Pata­go­nia has good inten­ti­ons to guaran­tee ani­mal wel­fa­re in the­ir clot­hing. Still, beca­use of the exten­ded sup­ply cha­ins and many inter­me­di­ari­es, it rema­ins chal­len­ging to say with 100% cer­ta­in­ty that all wool has been pro­du­ced in an ani­mal-fri­end­ly manner.

This does not only apply to Pata­go­nia but also to any brand that wor­ks with the RSW label.

Pro­duct design – 

The brand’s pro­duct design revol­ves aro­und cir­cu­la­rity and sus­ta­ina­ble mate­ri­als, keeping the enti­re life cycle of the pro­duct in mind. 

Slow fashi­on processes – 

The brand also acti­vely con­tri­bu­tes as an inno­va­tor and lob­byist for a sus­ta­ina­ble wor­ld. They expe­ri­men­ted with alter­na­ti­ve ear­ning models and star­ted a second-hand mar­ket with the­ir clot­hing. Pata­go­nia also ope­nly expre­sses its sup­port for the Gre­en New Deal. Every year, the com­pany dona­tes 1% of its tur­no­ver to pro­jec­ts that sup­port the pla­net. The­re­fo­re, even if the brand has a bad year, it dona­tes part of its tur­no­ver to charity.

Tran­s­pa­ren­cy on product -

Each pro­duct page gives deta­ils on the mate­ri­als and care ins­truc­ti­ons of the gar­ment, as well as asso­ci­ated cer­ti­fi­ca­ti­ons. They also sta­te the coun­try of ori­gin, howe­ver this only reflec­ts the final pro­duc­ti­on loca­ti­on, and not the sour­ce of the mate­ri­als or any other faci­li­ti­es inclu­ded in the pro­duc­ti­on of this garment.

Tran­s­pa­ren­cy on processes – 

Pata­go­ni­a’s web­si­te dis­plays the Cali­for­nia Tran­s­pa­ren­cy Act. Under each pro­duct on the web­si­te, it always says in which fac­tory the final pro­duct was made. Yet in 2020, we dis­co­ve­red that clot­hes ​‘made in Tha­iland’ on the web­si­te lis­ted a fac­tory in Japan at the bot­tom, which is confusing.

You will also find a map on the sus­ta­ina­bi­lity page showing the fac­to­ri­es, weaving mil­ls, and spin­ning mil­ls. On the map, you can fil­ter to show the far­ms whe­re the raw mate­ri­als come from, but this offers no resul­ts (Janu­ary 2023). In addi­ti­on, it is not cle­ar whet­her the list is up-to-date with what is sold. So the­re is room for impro­ve­ment in the bran­d’s transparency.