Forever 21 sustainability score: 9/100

Forever 21 has published zero emissions data. Commons Earth confirmed inability to find emissions tracking. With 354+ US stores, a 656,000 sq ft distribution center, and global supply chain, operational footprint is estimated at 50,000–100,000+ tonnes CO2e annually. Large company, complete non-disclosure.

Zero disclosure of supply chain emissions. Company does not publish supplier list or partner locations. Remake's 2022 Fashion Accountability Report found 'Information not disclosed' across all supply chain environmental categories. Massive global supply chain with complete opacity.

No emissions trajectory exists because no emissions have ever been tracked. Company exhibits 30–40% overproduction per season (PIRG) and relies on 60%+ fossil-fuel-based synthetics. Post-bankruptcy 2021 rebound to $2B revenue indicates rising production volumes and emissions through peak operations.

No renewable energy strategy; not RE100 member. Commons Earth found no renewable energy information. 354 large stores (38,000 sq ft avg) plus 656,000 sq ft distribution center operate on standard grid power. Only claim: vague 'energy efficient lighting in new stores' with no targets disclosed.

World Benchmarking Alliance 2022 Nature Benchmark ranks Forever 21 last, 'demonstrating lack of commitment across all measurement areas.' No biodiversity policy, deforestation commitment, or TNFD disclosure. Reliance on conventional cotton and fossil-fuel synthetics creates unmanaged nature impact across supply chain.

Linear fast-fashion model with zero circularity strategy. No take-back, repair, or recycling program. 30–40% overproduction per season (PIRG) heads to landfills or incinerators. Eco-Stylist confirmed 'no advancements in reducing waste.' Business model actively encourages overconsumption through ultra-low pricing.

Zero disclosure on water usage, footprint, or wastewater management. World Benchmarking Alliance confirms company 'does not disclose relevant information' on water. Good On You states company 'not transparent' on water management. No wastewater-cleaning technologies implemented despite heavy cotton and dyeing reliance.

No emissions reduction targets of any kind. Remake Fashion Accountability Report found company 'does not appear to have set science-based targets.' No SBTi engagement. No time-bound sustainability goals. Only claim: token donations ($0.05/bag, $1/t-shirt to American Forests), characterized as greenwashing by Eco-Stylist.

No sustainability report, no sustainability website page, no published environmental or social metrics. Good On You: 'insufficient information about actions to address impacts.' No supplier list, no factory disclosure, no audit outcomes shared. No sustainability governance or board oversight. Remake found 'Information not disclosed' across virtually all categories.

Documented labor violations: workers paid as low as $4/hour in LA factories (US Dept of Labor). Sued 50+ times for copyright infringement. Failed to sign Bangladesh Accord on Fire and Building Safety. Insufficient action on Uyghur forced labor-linked Xinjiang cotton. PIRG campaign against unsold clothing waste. Multiple sources characterize minimal claims as greenwashing.