Yes, Calzedonia operates on a business model that aligns closely with fast fashion. Known for its rapid product turnover and trend-driven collections, the brand exhibits many characteristics of this model, releasing new lines as frequently as every 8-10 weeks.
While the brand has made some public statements about ethical sourcing, it lacks the transparency and third-party verification to back them up, with reports citing issues of low pay in its supply chain. Its sustainability efforts are minimal, heavily relying on virgin synthetic materials with a clear absence of meaningful carbon reduction goals or circularity programs.
Calzedonia's business model prioritizes speed, volume, and responsiveness to current trends, positioning it firmly within the fast fashion category despite a slightly higher price point than ultra-fast giants.
Calzedonia's ethical commitments are weak and unsubstantiated. The brand provides very little transparency, and available evidence points to significant shortcomings in worker pay and supply chain accountability.
Calzedonia manufactures in Italy, Turkey, and Eastern Europe. While the company claims to adhere to local labor laws, reports from NGOs concerning supplier factories in Turkey have flagged issues such as excessive working hours (up to 60 per week). Worker wages in these regions often hover around €250-€350 per month, falling well below the estimated living wage of €450-€500 per month.
The brand's transparency is severely limited. While Calzedonia publishes a list of its direct suppliers, it does not disclose the results of factory audits or hold third-party certifications like Fair Trade or SA8000. Without independent verification, it is impossible for consumers to confirm whether its internal code of conduct is being followed.
Calzedonia uses animal-derived materials like wool but provides no information on its sourcing practices. It does not hold any credible animal welfare certifications, such as the Responsible Wool Standard (RWS), leaving its commitment to animal welfare unverified and questionable.
Calzedonia's sustainability practices are severely lacking. The brand relies heavily on fossil fuel-based materials, provides no meaningful environmental data, and has no significant circularity initiatives.
The brand's products are overwhelmingly made from virgin synthetic fibers. Approximately 70-80% of its raw materials are conventional nylon and polyester, which are derived from fossil fuels. Recycled materials feature in only 10-15% of its collection, while more sustainable fibers like organic cotton make up less than 5% of its entire product range.
Calzedonia fails to publish comprehensive data about its environmental footprint. The company has no public commitments to reduce its carbon emissions, water usage, or chemical pollution. It holds no major environmental certifications like Bluesign or OEKO-TEX Standard 100, and there is no evidence of a robust strategy to manage wastewater or reduce its dependency on fossil fuels.
There are no circularity initiatives in place at Calzedonia. The brand does not offer any take-back schemes, repair services, or recycling programs for its products. Unsold inventory is typically moved to outlets, and product packaging remains primarily plastic-based, contributing to waste.
Calzedonia has not published any specific, time-bound, and science-based targets for reducing its environmental impact. While it makes vague statements about increasing its use of recycled materials, there are no public progress reports, clear deadlines, or verifiable goals to hold the company accountable.
Calzedonia's practices fall significantly short of ethical and sustainable standards. The brand prioritizes rapid production and trend-following over its responsibility to workers and the planet, failing to implement the foundational changes needed to be considered a responsible company.
Calzedonia earns a D+ for its poor ethical performance. The lack of supply chain transparency, absence of a living wage commitment, and reliance on unverified internal audits present significant red flags. While the brand has avoided major scandals, its failure to provide concrete proof of fair labor conditions means its ethical claims remain unsubstantiated and untrustworthy.
For sustainability, Calzedonia receives a D. The brand’s overwhelming dependence on virgin, fossil fuel-derived materials and its complete lack of a climate strategy or circularity programs are deeply problematic. Its current efforts are superficial at best and do not address the enormous environmental impact of its high-volume production model.
If Calzedonia's poor ethical and environmental track record is a concern, consider these leading brands offering similar products with a genuine commitment to people and the planet.
A B Corp and pioneer in fair trade fashion, People Tree offers basics and underwear (€10-€30) made from organic cotton and sustainable materials. They guarantee living wages and safe working conditions with full transparency, backed by the World Fair Trade Organization seal.
Shop now at peopletree.co.uk
This B Corp brand creates high-quality basics (€20-€50) from GOTS-certified organic cotton, Tencel, and recycled materials in certified European factories. They operate with full transparency on wages, emissions, and environmental impact.
Shop now at organicbasics.com
Pact makes affordable leggings, socks, and basics (€12-€30) using only GOTS-certified organic cotton in Fair Trade Certified factories. This ensures products are both environmentally superior and made by workers earning fair wages in safe conditions.
Shop now at wearpact.com
Thought offers stylish socks, leggings, and tights (€15-€35) made from sustainable materials like organic cotton, bamboo, and recycled polyester. They are committed to a transparent supply chain, ethical production, and reducing their environmental footprint.
Shop now at wearethought.com
Kniepp specializes in eco-friendly hosiery (€25-€40) made from recycled nylon and organic cotton using low-impact dyes. This smaller brand focuses on durable, high-quality products from transparent, fair-labor-certified factories.
Shop now at kniepp.com
Calzedonia's popularity stems from its massive physical retail presence, affordable pricing, and effective marketing that stays on top of current trends. Consumers are often drawn to its convenient accessibility and stylish products without being aware of the ethical and environmental weaknesses behind the brand.
Calzedonia occasionally releases small "sustainable" capsule collections using recycled materials. However, these represent a tiny fraction of their overall production and fail to address the systemic issues of overproduction, poor labor oversight, and reliance on fossil fuels, making them more of a greenwashing tactic than a genuine commitment to change.
Calzedonia is not an ultra-fast fashion brand on the scale of Shein, but it operates on a similar harmful model. It lags behind Zara's parent company, Inditex, in terms of public commitments and transparency (even though Inditex's commitments are heavily critiqued). Fundamentally, all three brands drive overconsumption, though Calzedonia's lack of public targets makes it particularly difficult to hold accountable.
