Better without harmful substances
Risk analysis begins with material selection
Each season, we assess the risk of harmful substances for all new products and transitory articles.
First we assign the item to a related risk class:
| Risk Class A | Risk Class B | Risk Class C |
|---|---|---|
|
children's products and products that come into direct contact with skin |
products with occasional skin contact |
products without skin contact |
|
children's apparel |
apparel |
backpacks |
|
bike pants |
Jackets (hardshell/softshell) |
tents |
|
bike jerseys |
labels |
POS articles (beanbags, other giveaways) |
|
all headwear (hats, caps, etc.) |
pants |
packaging |
|
blouses |
pullovers |
|
|
gloves |
rain pants |
|
|
scarves |
yarn |
|
|
sleeping bag inner material |
shirts |
|
|
socks |
skirts |
|
|
base layer |
sleeping bag outer material |
|
|
child carriers |
shoes |
|
|
sandals |
|
|
In the next step, we implement a material-based risk analysis:
Categories
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
textiles and textile made from natural fibers |
textiles and textile goods made from synthetic fibers |
textiles and textile goods with print/coating |
leather |
synthetics (PU, PVC, rubber, TPU, TPR, EVA, etc.) |
metal elements |
Systematic analysis of harmful substances
Our assessment method for harmful substance management is shown in a flowchart which follows each product. In this risk analysis, we find out which tests are necessary to detect any existing harmful substances.
Our assessment system is divided into an assessment of the article’s area of use, a review of the materials used and an assessment of the overall product.
If, for example, we manufacture a kids’ bike shirt made from synthetic fibers with a large print, then the T-shirt falls in risk class A (child). The material, a synthetic fiber, creates a higher risk of harmful substances than that of cotton. The large print may also contain plasticizers, thereby increasing the risk. But if we use bluesign® materials for the shirt, the risk is very low because these materials have already been rigorously tested.
Tests in independent laboratories
Random checks on the finished product are used to confirm that the system has worked. In addition, we take several articles from the production line each season and test them in an independent laboratory.
When there are discrepancies, we evaluate them in accordance with VAUDE’s own very strict limits or the legal limits of the sale country. Necessary measures are taken. In the worst case scenario, we destroy the merchandise.
One sample not marketable, production had to be destroyed
In 2014 a total of 30 random samples were made of marketable goods.
One sample did not meet the REACH requirements. The entire affected batch was destroyed.
All other random samples met the legal requirements (REACH, CPSIA, etc.)
Furthermore, a number of new materials were tested in accordance with our RSL to clarify whether these new materials can be used in our future products.
Risk analysis of producer’s supply chains
We developed a producer ranking that will help us to identify weak areas in our system. Together with the affected producers, a risk analysis of their supply chain has been implemented since 2014. This should help us further minimize risk.
To date, 23 producers have been evaluated in accordance with this system. We have found significant differences in the organization of chemical management at various producers. Together with the producers, we have developed and are tracking the implementation of Corrective Action Plans.
Tackling problems at their source
We rely on a partnership-oriented, active relationship with our producers to tackle the problem at its source. We want to make sure, right from the beginning of production, that the products meet our requirements. When we examine finished merchandise at the end of production, we have only limited or no ability to react.
| GRI: | PR1 |
