Old Spice

Old Spice doesn't make any cohesive ingredient commitments at the brand-level. Its parent company makes a few commitments across all owned brands, but it's unclear what applies to this brand. Choice of ingredients is a strong determinant of environmental impact. It uses many ingredients that pose a significant threat to the climate, including petrochemical-based ingredients, microplastics and other ingredients like uncertified mica. Old Spice doesn't report having any product or company-level certifications.

Old Spice doesn't report thoroughly on its packaging materials at a brand level. It appears to use some environmentally-mindful materials in its packaging, including ones that are recyclable, but it likely still relies on virgin plastic.

Old Spice's parent company, P&G, shares information on its overall energy strategy but doesn't provide details at the brand-level. It uses a majority of renewable energy to power its production sites and corporate offices, and is targeting 100% renewable energy by 2030, for which it's on track. It implements energy efficiency measures in its production sites, but doesn't provide many specifics or detail if this extends to its corporate offices. It has water conservation initiatives in its production focused on water restoration and water positivity.

Commons couldn't find evidence that this brand offers any alternative models to lower its waste footprint, such as refills or takeback programs. It offers bulk sizes for some products, which may help reduce packaging waste. It doesn't provide any guidance to help customers properly recycle or dispose of its products.

Old Spice offers seasonal products or frequent releases, which can encourage overconsumption and production of excess inventory.

Commons is still evaluating this brand's marketing emails.

Old Spice doesn't appear to have a sustainability page or centralized source of relevant information, this signals a lack of transparency and accountability. Its parent's last annual report was published in 2023. Old Spice shares a complete list of ingredients used in its products, on a per product basis.

Old Spice's parent company, P&G, internally measures and publicly reports its company-level emissions in partnership with, or with auditing from, a third party. It includes a breakdown by scope and identifies its top driver of emissions. The last reporting period was 2023. In this most recent update, its estimated emissions footprint was 192,739,586 tons CO2e. This is higher than the annual total emissions from many countries, including the Philippines and the Netherlands.

Old Spice's parent company, P&G, has SBTi-approved emissions reduction targets for the medium-term (5-10 years). It has reported on its progress within the past year, and is on track for its scope 1 + 2 targets but not its scope 3 target. Its net zero commitment was recently removed by SBTi for not meeting the deadline to provide science-based targets. Commons couldn't find evidence that this brand offsets any emissions.

Old Spice's parent company, P&G, doesn't publish information about its supply chain partners. It publicly shares a supplier code of conduct, which prohibits forced labor, prohibits child labor, and includes environmental clauses. Its code of conduct doesn't disallow unauthorized subcontracting, ensure the right to collective bargaining where not allowed by law, ensure a living wage, or establish grievance mechanisms. P&G has a stated policy of regularly auditing its supply chain partners, which can mitigate human and environmental risks.

Old Spice's parent company, P&G, discloses all of its trade association memberships, including those that are climate-obstructive. P&G is a member of 4 large climate-obstructive trade associations: U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Business Roundtable, Personal Care Products Council, American Chemistry Council. It isn't a member of advocacy organizations advancing climate policy. P&G employs state lobbyists with few fossil fuel aligned clients. P&G donated $500k-1M to climate-obstructive candidates or PACs from 2018-2024. Of this amount, 12.99% more was given to obstructive candidates or PACs than to pro-climate ones.