Hollister Co. sustainability score: 27/100

A&F Co. (Hollister's parent) reports Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions via annual CDP disclosure using GHG Protocol methodology. The 2023 CDP report references full Scope 1 and 2 data; DitchCarbon records 2024 A&F Co. figures as Scope 1 of ~8,568 tCO₂e and Scope 2 of ~26,705 tCO₂e. The Hollister 2024 Sustainability Report highlights a 13% reduction in Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions against the 2022 baseline. No third-party limited assurance or independent verification of the GHG inventory is documented in publicly available sources. Hollister-specific Scope 1 and 2 data is not broken out separately from the parent entity — data is consolidated at A&F Co. level. No granular breakdown by facility type or geography is published.

A&F Co. discloses Scope 3 emissions via CDP annually. The Commons Earth citing the 2023 CDP-reported total across all scopes at approximately 1,137,221 tCO₂e, with purchased goods and services being the largest Scope 3 category. DitchCarbon records 2024 Scope 3 at approximately 79,449 tCO₂e (company-reported). The stand.earth Fossil Free Fashion scorecard notes A&F 'reports its full emissions to CDP, but does not provide any detail on emissions by country or supplier tier' and that supply chain energy data is not disclosed. Tier 1 and 90% of Tier 2 supplier lists are published. No full Scope 3 third-party verification is documented. Supply chain engagement is present (Apparel Impact Institute Carbon Leadership Program) but financial support for supplier decarbonisation is absent.

The 2024 Hollister Sustainability Report records a 13% absolute reduction in Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions against the 2022 baseline — this is an evidenced absolute reduction in operational emissions. Stand.earth noted a 17% Scope 3 decrease versus the 2019 baseline as of 2023, but this is relative to a pre-pandemic baseline four-plus years prior with no multi-year absolute Scope 3 trend published for 2022–2024. No CDP-verified year-on-year absolute Scope 3 trend table is publicly available for the 2022–2024 period. The score is capped at 4 because only Scope 1 and 2 trajectory data is evidenced across a short window (2022 baseline); the supply chain trajectory, which represents the dominant share of emissions, is not confirmed as declining on an absolute basis in recent years.

Since January 2023, A&F Co.'s global home office and two distribution centers in New Albany, Ohio are supplied under a 13-year renewable energy agreement with AEP Energy, matched with renewable energy credits (RECs). The A&F Co. climate page confirms that since January 2025, 100% of electricity at the home office and two DCs is matched with RECs. However, the global store network of 700-plus locations remains on standard grid electricity with no published renewable energy target or programme for retail stores. Stand.earth confirms 'no targets to increase renewable energy in its own operations or supply chain.' The renewable coverage is limited to HQ and DCs only, delivered via unbundled RECs — capped at a green tariff equivalent for a fraction of the estate.

Good On You (updated January 2026) states there is 'no evidence it's taking actions to protect biodiversity in its supply chain.' The World Benchmarking Alliance 2022 Nature Benchmark ranked A&F Co. 45 out of 66 in the apparel and footwear industry, noting it 'does not disclose a sustainability strategy with nature-related targets.' No TNFD adoption, no deforestation-free commitment, and no nature footprint assessment has been published. RAN singled out A&F Co. among the 'Fashion 15' group for 'inadequate policies and commitments to ensure that the fabrics it sources are not responsible for deforestation.' Hollister relies heavily on conventional cotton, virgin polyester, and uncertified leather — all commodities with documented nature risks. No biodiversity restoration or ecosystem engagement is disclosed.

A&F Co. achieved a 40% reduction in Global Home Office waste versus a 2019 baseline in FY2024, and shopping bags in stores are made from at least 60% recycled content and are fully recyclable. Hollister participates in polybag recycling where mall programmes exist. However, the thredUP partnership — Hollister's primary consumer-facing sustainability programme — has been criticised by multiple sources as incentivising further consumption rather than genuine circularity (customers receive gift cards, not recycling without a purchase incentive). The Commons Earth notes Hollister 'appears to still rely on virgin plastic packaging.' Materials remain predominantly high-emission — conventional cotton and virgin polyester — with goals to reach only 25% recycled polyester by 2025 that the parent company was reported to be behind on. No closed-loop or comprehensive take-back programme for garments.

A&F Co. requires all denim washhouses to comply with ZDHC wastewater guidelines (23 physical and chemical parameters), and uses Jeanologia Environmental Impact Monitoring software to measure water consumption per denim unit. Third-party compliance audits for wastewater discharge permits are conducted as part of the annual social audit. However, the World Benchmarking Alliance notes that while ZDHC testing is required, 'there is no evidence of the process of monitoring test results and managing positive tests for water pollutants.' No absolute water consumption reduction target has been published for the supply chain. No quantified water footprint at corporate level is disclosed. No independent verification of water stewardship. Water intensity practices exist in denim operations but fall short of a monitored reduction programme with public targets.

A&F Co. submitted SBTi commitment in January 2024, and in August 2025 SBTi assessed and approved its Scope 1, 2, and 3 targets. Validated targets: 55.7% absolute reduction in Scope 1 and 2 by 2030 from a 2019 base year, and 27.5% absolute reduction in Scope 3 purchased goods and services by the same deadline. These are absolute targets, not intensity-based, and are now SBTi-validated. A 90% reduction across all scopes by 2050 with net-zero via carbon offsets is the long-term goal — the explicit offset mention for net-zero introduces some concern about residual offset reliance. No independently verified carbon removals or CDR programme is documented. The 2030 near-term targets are now validated, qualifying for a 6, but the Scope 3 target covers only selected categories (purchased goods, upstream transport, end-of-life) rather than all material Scope 3 categories, which limits ambition.

A&F Co. maintains an ESG/Sustainability Committee at Board level, with the Board's Nominating and Board Governance Committee overseeing environmental and social strategy risks. A dedicated Global Sustainability Department manages goal-setting, reporting, and implementation. Annual CDP Climate Change disclosures are published, along with a TCFD index and SASB index. The 2025 CDP report is published on the company website. However, no third-party limited assurance of the GHG inventory is documented in publicly available materials, executive compensation is not confirmed as linked to sustainability targets, and Hollister as a brand does not publish standalone environmental data — all disclosure is at the A&F Co. parent level. The Fashion Transparency Index 2025 scored A&F Co.'s brands at 14% — at the industry average, not indicating leading transparency.

Start at 8. Deductions applied: RAN credible NGO criticism specifically naming A&F (parent of Hollister) as among 'Fashion 15' for inadequate deforestation and supply chain policies (−1). The thredUP takeback programme has been documented by multiple sources as functioning primarily to drive further consumption rather than genuine circularity, meeting the threshold for a greenwashing indicator (−1). The Green Supply Chain CITI score of 17.16/100 and the Fashion Transparency Index score of 14% from a specialist auditor (Ethical Consumer's 2025 assessment) reflect a documented pattern of supply chain opacity. Industry watchdogs raised Xinjiang cotton sourcing concerns (−1). No active lobbying against climate policy is documented; no InfluenceMap profile found for A&F Co. specifically. No upheld regulatory action on environmental grounds in the research window. Final score: 8 − 3 = 5. Two independent third-party sources (RAN, Fashion Transparency Index via Ethical Consumer) support deductions above 3.