Online fast-fashion giant Shein has scored 28 out of 100 in the 11th Baptist World Aid ethical fashion report, released Tuesday, beating several well-known Australian retailers including Myer, Ghanda, and Windsor Smith. The report assessed 138 companies and 543 fashion brands, with Shein's score above that of Temu, which scored zero, and several local brands that did not participate in the research. The average score across all companies was 31.5, with only 13% able to demonstrate evidence of paying a living wage to any supply chain workers.
The Baptist World Aid ethical fashion report evaluates companies on five supply chain categories, including worker empowerment and environmental sustainability, scoring them out of 100. Shein's score of 28 placed it ahead of Myer (20), Boardriders, owner of Quiksilver, Roxy and Billabong (3), Bec and Bridge (3), and several others that scored zero, including Ghanda, Windsor Smith, and Temu. The report noted that Shein supplied additional information to researchers, while many of the low-scoring companies did not respond to repeated engagement attempts. Overall, 58% of companies were assessed solely on publicly available information, which tends to yield lower rankings.
The report highlighted that Australia is the world's highest consumer of textiles per person, with more than 200,000 tonnes of clothing sent to landfill each year. 'Overproduction particularly remains a growing challenge to sustainability,' the report said. The highest-scoring brand was Australian underwear label Mighty Good Basics, with a score of 94, though it was described as an outlier. The average score improved by just 0.2% since the 2024 report.
Baptist World Aid's ethical fashion lead, Katherine Halliday, defended the methodology and said some companies have a bigger 'appetite for transparency' than others. She said the report was 'designed to answer the question: How strong are the systems a company has to protect exploitation of workers across the supply chain?' Halliday added that a modern slavery statement alone is not enough, and called for more government action to compel improvements. Some brand owners have previously objected to the methodology, arguing that a focus on a 'living wage' can benefit international fast-fashion brands. Temu said all its sellers must comply with a third-party code of conduct prohibiting forced labour and requiring safe working conditions.
Halliday said she was 'heartened' by Shein's improved score from previous years, attributing it to public scrutiny and resulting changes in practice. However, she noted that 'everyone has a lot of room to improve.'
Analysis
Why This Matters
- The report reveals a transparency gap: brands that engage with researchers score higher, raising questions about the accuracy of rankings based only on public information.
- As Australia's textile waste mounts, over 200,000 tonnes annually, pressure is growing on retailers to prove their supply chains are ethical and sustainable.
- The sluggish average improvement (0.2%) suggests voluntary efforts are insufficient, strengthening calls for government regulation.
Background
The Baptist World Aid ethical fashion report has been published annually for 11 years, assessing companies on policies related to worker welfare, environmental practices, and supply chain transparency. Scores are based on a 100-point scale, with businesses invited to submit evidence over a 13-month engagement period. Brands that do not participate are scored only on publicly available information, which typically results in lower marks. This year's report covered 138 companies and 543 fashion brands, including both large international players and Australian retailers.
Key Perspectives
Baptist World Aid / Katherine Halliday: The report's authors say the methodology is robust and designed to measure systemic protections against exploitation. They argue that low scores by non-respondents reflect a lack of transparency, not an artifact of the scoring system. Halliday called for government intervention to push the industry forward.
Shein and Temu: Shein participated in the research and its score improved from previous years, which Halliday linked to public scrutiny. Temu, which scored zero, issued a statement saying all its sellers must adhere to a third-party code of conduct prohibiting forced labor and mandating safe conditions.
Australian retailers (low scorers): Many brands, including Myer, Ghanda, Windsor Smith, and Seafolly, did not respond to the research process. Some industry voices have previously criticised the report's methodology, arguing that its emphasis on living wage evidence can advantage fast-fashion companies that have formal systems but questionable overall impact.
Critics and consumers: Environmental advocates note that even companies with moderate scores, like Shein, are still associated with overproduction and overconsumption. The report itself highlights that 'overproduction remains a growing challenge.'
What to Watch
- Whether any of the low-scoring Australian retailers respond publicly or change their engagement with future reports.
- The Australian government's response to calls for mandatory supply chain due diligence legislation.
- Next year's scores: will Shein's improvement continue, and will Temu engage with researchers to improve its score?
