abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb

このページは 日本語 では利用できません。English で表示されています

記事

2007年12月15日

著者:
AFP

Luxury firms slammed for lacklustre moves to save planet

The luxury industry is not doing its bit to save the planet, according to a World Wildlife Fund study of the world's 10 largest publicly-traded luxury firms. In a study...WWF...chided luxury brands for being "slow to recognise their responsibilities and opportunities" vis-a-vis global warming and ethical trade...But the best score obtained by the world's 10 luxury giants in the WWF's ranking of A to F -- best score to worst score -- was a C+ by...L'Oreal. It was followed by Hermes and LVMH (owners notably of Louis Vuitton, TAG Heuer, Fendi, Marc Jacobs and top champagnes)...Bottom of the chart was...Tod's, with an F...Bulgari...came second last...while...Richemont was third to bottom...