Boosting Beauty’s Sustainability Game

In beauty, much like fashion, it’s the quick wins in sustainability that tend to break through into consumer consciousness: recycled packaging, refillable products or cruelty-free and vegan formulations. But the real work — the deep work — is more challenging for brands to do, prove and communicate. And few beauty consumers have the mental capacity or time to thoroughly interrogate these efforts. As the sector evolves and sustainability plays become more sophisticated, how can brands push through stickier subjects and create meaningful change

In this chapter, we examine how beauty brands are achieving progress against both environmental and social impact criteria, ranging from supply chain elements like manufacturing and packaging, to the implementation of policies around diversity and labour equality. Using a unique audit methodology, Vogue Business benchmarks brands against 25 ESG metrics in an analysis that incorporates data on the consumer perception of brand sustainability efforts, as well as the behaviours they consider sustainable. This exposes an important distinction: what a consumer considers a ‘sustainable’ brand — and why — can often sit at odds with the execution of a brand’s ESG strategy, revealing the need for work on consumer education.

ESG’s 2025 class

The Ordinary defended its leading position in the ESG ranking for 2025, followed closely by Kiehl’s and Farmacy. While The Ordinary measures favourably across most metrics, its score is boosted by consumer perception of its ESG status. That noted, not much has changed in a year, and the average score of brands has gone down slightly, indicating that progress has stagnated or declined in many cases, in part because reporting has been scaled back. Aesop and Clarins also sit within ESG’s top five, with Clarins moving up by two positions, despite its newly awarded B-Corp certification helping strengthen its score.

During our 2025 data capture period, fewer than half of the brands examined published an updated ESG report. There is a clear lack of transparency around the ESG efforts of some of beauty’s biggest players, making it harder to scrutinise the commitments of brands and their progress in meeting them. Another hurdle brands face is moving shoppers beyond the awareness stage to actually adopting more responsible beauty options. Refills are a solid example: despite 18 of the 30 index brands offering some form of refillable beauty offering, only three (Charlotte Tilbury, Kiehl’s and La Roche-Posay) actively encourage or incentivise their consumers to use them. Charlotte Tilbury, for example, enables shoppers to refill creams and compacts with magnetic product capsules or inserts. It also offers a 15 per cent discount when shoppers subscribe to the refill programme. As more beauty consumers demand convenience and efficacy, simply offering responsible options is no longer enough — brands must make an effort to guide consumers through responsible adoption via effective communication, education and incentivisation.

No certainty with certification

While nearly all brands are doing something to improve their ESG accountability, including partnerships with the likes of B Corp, Peta and Leaping Bunny, there’s no clear winner when it comes to certification. Even some of the most recognised and trusted certification programmes, like B Corp, have faced criticism, particularly as they often rely on self-assessment, leading to concerns about greenwashing or inaccuracy. This makes it much harder to establish what ‘good’ looks like, and who has the authority on sustainable progress.

While not fully exhaustive, the Vogue Business Beauty Index assesses participation in several certification schemes, including B Corp, Fairtrade, Peta, Leaping Bunny, FSC, RSPO and the use of certified organic ingredients by schemes such as Cosmos. As greenwashing watchdogs clamp down on fashion and beauty brands — and consumers become increasingly discerning — brands are turning to certifications to appear more credible and help verify their marketing claims.

Participation in Fairtrade, one of the most recognised partnership programmes, is surprisingly low among index brands, as is the visible use of organic ingredients in beauty formulations. Only five index brands claim to use ‘organic’ ingredients in at least 20 per cent of their products. These include The Ordinary, Farmacy, Glow Recipe and Milk Makeup. While definitions vary slightly by market, generally 95 per cent of the agricultural content must be free from chemical pesticides or fertilisers to be defined as organic. When it comes to ingredients that follow the ISO 16128 guidelines, established in 2016 to assess the natural and organic origins of beauty ingredients or products, the audit could not establish any brands that use or manufacture with ingredients that meet these standards across more than 20 per cent of the assortment. Milk Makeup was a rare example that even stated the adoption of these guidelines as an ambition.

Clarins Group acquired 115 hectares of land to help streamline its ingredients sourcing.

Photo: Courtesy of Clarins

In contrast, 80 per cent of Beauty Index brands offer products that are certified ‘vegan’ or ‘cruelty-free’, indicating a larger interest in concerns around animal-derived or animal-tested ingredients versus organic formulations. However, when asked about why they consider brands to be sustainable, 67 per cent cited the offering of clean products (for example, those formulated without ‘toxic’ ingredients) versus 57 per cent who attribute it to a brand’s ‘cruelty-free’ credentials. This shows that, while brands are more conscious of their manufacturing processes, consumers are increasingly seeking clean or organic formulas.

From the design up

In 2025, 63 per cent of brands offer refillable beauty products, representing no change since the 2024 Beauty Index. Of the five newcomers to the study, refillable options are offered by just two brands: Byoma and Sol de Janeiro. However even for these brands, the refillable options are often limited to refill bottles that enable you to use the dispenser mechanism, such as serum droppers. Despite many beauty players not engaging in refillables at all, the prevailing challenge for those that do remains in encouraging shoppers to make use of these programmes. Only three of the 19 brands offering refills make the effort to educate shoppers on the availability and benefits of such schemes, while encouraging or incentivising engagement.

Rethinking product packaging can also play a role in reducing waste. Some packaging designs, with ambitions to boost sustainability credentials, have instead had negative impacts on user experience. The use of recyclable glass vessels for products like liquid foundations or concealers, for example, is often rigid, heavy and more expensive from a materials perspective, while harbouring the final millilitres of a product.

The latter has even given way to hack content on social platforms, ranging from running bottles under hot water to using plastic straws, Q-tips or brushes to scoop out the (sometimes pricey) product remnants. The need for disposable plastic tools to simply access the remaining product defeats the purpose of implementing recyclable materials in the first place. The problem isn’t that recyclable materials, such as glass, are inherently bad alternatives, but rather that the user experience needs to be improved from an innovation and design perspective.

Some brands have already begun making the switch to alternative materials that improve sustainability while maintaining flexibility, user-friendliness, and aesthetic appeal. Examples include aluminium tubes for creams, gels and liquid cosmetics from brands like Costa Brazil and Uni; glass jars with wider openings; or roller applicators, allowing for maximum product extraction. This is more common in personal care categories, where brands like AKT deliver deodorant products in attractive, sustainable packaging solutions.

Case study: Rare Beauty’s inclusive innovation

Thinking strategically — and practically — about user-friendly packaging can also enable products to be more inclusive, as well as broaden appeal to marginalised groups. Beauty brands have long overlooked consumers with mobility challenges, but certain brands are putting more effort into researching and implementing product design adaptations to ensure greater accessibility. This includes exploring how beauty products can be made more user-friendly for shoppers with limited mobility, the use of single limbs, or unstable motor functions.

One brand that excels in accessible packaging, enabling consumers with mobility challenges to get more utility out of products, is Rare Beauty, the cosmetics company founded by Selena Gomez. Gomez, who was diagnosed with lupus in 2021, has been open about the personal challenges she faces with her physical health due to the condition. In 2023, the brand partnered with the Casa Colina Research Institute (CCRI), a research arm of Casa Colina Hospital and Centers for Healthcare, to inform Rare’s ‘Made Accessible’ initiative. Together, the organisations investigated how products could be designed for all customers, including those with dexterity challenges. The outcome was three key design principles for beauty products:

• Packaging that’s easy to use.
• Packaging finishes that allow for a secure grip.
• Applicators that are comfortable to hold and manoeuvre with precision.

The results can be seen across changes in the packaging of products like its Soft Pinch Liquid Blush, which offers a cap design for easy opening and application, as well as a matte finish to improve grip. Meanwhile, the brand’s Positive Light Tinted Moisturiser has a specially designed cap to enable single-handed opening, as does its Kind Words Matte Lipstick.

By implementing accessibility-led design changes across the entire product rollout, Rare Beauty ensures that a subset of consumers, who often have to shop at more niche brands or lines, are considered in its core cult offerings.

Jon Saenz, global brand president of Kiehl’s.

Photo: Courtesy of Kiehl’s

Q&A: Jon Saenz

Global brand president | Kiehl’s

ESG is a wide-ranging remit covering the environment, social responsibility and more, with everything from origin to end use of products needing to be taken into consideration. What do you think the beauty industry should be prioritising?

Looking at the industry, there are two key areas that we believe should be at the forefront of everyone’s minds. Firstly, it’s about sourcing ingredients derived from nature, but doing so through truly environmentally responsible production and harvesting processes. It’s not just about what comes from nature, but how it comes to us.

Secondly, and perhaps even more critically, the industry must prioritise driving a more circular economy for our packaging. This isn’t just about making incremental improvements. It means fundamentally rethinking how we design packaging. It involves not only reducing components and integrating post-consumer recycled materials wherever possible, but crucially, it means actively engaging consumers to refill their beloved products. This creates a powerful loop where products are used, packaging is refilled, and waste is significantly minimised. Our refill programme at Kiehl’s, for example, is a direct manifestation of this priority, and we’re seeing fantastic results.

A significant proportion of consumers we surveyed within our study are excited about the idea of refillable products. What advancements is Kiehl’s making within this space?

At Kiehl’s, we’ve really leant into refillable products, particularly with our convenient refill pouches. These aren’t just a small step; they represent a significant leap forward in reducing our environmental footprint. For instance, you can now find refill pouches for many of our customer favourites, including our iconic Ultra Facial Cream.

The impact of these pouches is quite remarkable. They use significantly less plastic — between 61 per cent and 81 per cent less — compared to repeatedly buying new jars or bottles of the same product. Secondly, these pouches contain a generous amount of formula, typically two to four times the amount found in the original product. And finally, we’ve made recycling much simpler. Customers can simply bring their empty refill pouches back to any local Kiehl’s store, and as a thank you for their sustainable choice, they’ll be rewarded with loyalty points.

While consumers are excited about refills, converting these to use refillable solutions can be a challenge. What challenges is the industry facing with usage? And how is Kiehl’s engaging consumers with this packaging model?

The biggest challenge for refills is influencing consumers to change their behaviour. For example, last year we ran a campaign ‘Don’t Rebuy, Just Refill’, leveraging our heritage at Mount Everest. In partnership with award-winning director Mark Waring, the hero content was set on Mount Everest and featured animated plastic trash (made from found objects) singing a parody of ‘I Will Survive’. Utilising stop motion, the animation uses humour by bringing abandoned plastic to life, symbolising how plastic can live for hundreds of years as waste, or be reused forever in a bathroom by using refill pouches.

What certification partners is Kiehl’s working with? Which have been the most worthwhile?

With the introduction of our 2030 ambition to drive a more circular economy, Kiehl’s has, most recently, focused on Cradle to Cradle’s certification, which focuses on product circularity. The certification allows us to validate our approach and build trust with consumers.

Key takeaways:

• Certifying on shaky ground. Despite a lack of compliance with organic ingredients guidelines, beauty players are turning to certifications to help verify their marketing claims, regardless of their efficiency.
• Bridging the education gap. It’s not enough to just offer refill programmes — brands must actively encourage shoppers to use them, which can create an additional touchpoint to engage with customers post-sale.
• Holistic design opportunities. By rethinking design, brands can create packaging that is not only recyclable but also user-friendly and increases accessibility.