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

이 페이지는 한국어로 제공되지 않으며 English로 표시됩니다.

기사

2007년 12월 15일

저자:
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...