What Patagonia’s New Impact Report Can Teach Other Companies
November 19, 2025
Patagonia released its first ever impact report last Wednesday, aptly titled a “Work in Progress.” At a time when most Corporate Social Responsibility reports celebrate corporate accomplishments while glossing over their challenges, Patagonia’s report offers a welcome departure.
Most corporate sustainability reports feel like marketing exercises, opening with an earnest CEO letter expressing the company’s environmental and social commitments, then highlighting its community or environmental initiatives, including the firm’s record of philanthropic gifts. Typically, they close with photos of smiling employees. Uplifting, maybe, but rarely do they give the full picture, especially when it comes to human rights risks in their global operations.
Patagonia’s report is starkly different. The entire document is centered on the ongoing challenges Patagonia faces throughout its global supply chain, and the work it still needs to do. This shift matters—and other companies need to take note.
We live in a moment when consumers, especially young people, are highly skeptical of corporate claims with respect to these issues, claims that ring hollow and bring charges of greenwashing. This is also a time of rising public expectations: stakeholders want greater transparency, clearer acknowledgment of the risks and realities, and meaningful accountability for poor performance. Patagonia has long positioned itself outside the mold, but this report marks an important milestone by putting real issues and challenges in full public view.
What struck me most is how closely this impact assessment resembles the kind of reports our Center for Business and Human Rights produces. Patagonia chose not to celebrate progress in isolation. Instead, it chose to study, analyze, visit, and verify, and then communicate honestly what it found.
A few decisions stand out:
Publishing a broad and inclusive assessment
Pages 10 and 11 walk through the ways Patagonia evaluates impact, both on its core business and on people and the environment affected by its business operations—the ‘double materiality’ approach. Few companies address this tension so publicly or elect to use higher European corporate sustainability standards voluntarily. The transparency—even if incomplete—is remarkable.
A deeply detailed section on human rights—16 pages of it
This includes how Patagonia engages with workers across the supply chain and the company’s own assessment of where gaps remain. One excerpt stands out:
“We do not own farms, mills or factories. Yet what’s done in our name can’t be invisible to us… every one of our products begins its life in the hands of factory workers, the majority of whom are women. We could not be in business without them.”
This statement mirrors a principle our center at NYU Stern constantly emphasizes: even if a company doesn’t own the facility, if its name is on the product, it bears responsibility.
Patagonia also acknowledges the crucial role of independent third-party partners in advancing transparency and accountability within its supply chain. They express appreciation for organizations like the Fair Labor Association (FLA), where our director, Michael Posner, served as chairman of the board until November of this year. In the report, Patagonia goes beyond name-checking these partners—they describe how engagement with the FLA helps validate their findings, strengthen accountability, and reinforce industry standards.
A willingness to discuss issues most companies avoid—like migrant worker fees
Patagonia dedicates two full pages to explaining its efforts to eliminate recruitment fees. Thuy Nguyen, Patagonia’s senior manager of social responsibility, describes how paying down these fees transformed workers’ lives:
“If we hadn’t pushed to eliminate fees for migrant workers, those workers would still be handing a labor broker $50 to $70 a month…. Now all those fees are being picked up by their employers.”
Most companies avoid any mention of this topic. Patagonia not only addresses it, but also explains the challenges, the trade-offs, and the reasons why the policy is worth pursuing.
Since Patagonia released the report last week, there has been a flood of positive commentary about the report on social media. It has hit a nerve, giving informed consumers and civil society activists what they have long sought, namely, a transparent and honest accounting of the true challenges companies face in today’s globalized economy.
By revealing its own vulnerability, Patagonia has given the public an authentic x-ray of its own business and the risks associated with the outsourcing of production. This honest self-assessment resonates far more effectively than polished talking points. Companies do not build trust by only highlighting what they’ve done right. They build trust by showing where they are struggling, what they’re learning, and how they’re willing to change.
The Work in Progress report sets a new benchmark for what corporate communication on sustainability, labor, and human rights can look like. More companies need to follow Patagonia’s example.
Related
See all
