Asics Sustainability Profile

ASICS presents sustainability as part of its core business, with a focus on two main areas: people and planet. It says it wants to support health and well-being while also cutting emissions, using more recycled materials, and improving supply chain transparency. Independent rating sites show a mixed picture. Good On You rates the brand “It’s a start,” while The Commons Earth says ASICS has made progress on materials, energy use, reporting, and supply chain disclosure, but still has gaps in packaging, responsible rubber, and repair services. ASICS also publishes a sustainability report and says it has science-based climate targets, but some claims are still stronger on paper than in outside verification.

Positive Sentiment Found
Public and third-party coverage shows that ASICS has a fairly strong sustainability story compared with many sportswear brands, but not a perfect one. Good On You rates the brand “It’s a start,” which is a middle-ground result on its 1-to-5 scale, and notes progress on recycled materials, climate targets, supplier grievance systems, and some lower-risk or certified facilities. The Commons Earth gives ASICS an “Acceptable+” materials rating and a stronger accountability score, pointing to a detailed sustainability page, annual reporting, emissions tracking, SBTi-approved targets, supplier disclosure, and a take-back partnership with Give Back Box. The Japan Times also highlighted ASICS for its ESG work and gave it a Sustainable Japan Awards Grand Prize in 2023. Together, these sources suggest the brand is seen as active and more transparent than average, especially on climate and reporting.

Common Criticisms:
The main criticism across independent sources is that ASICS still has clear gaps between its claims and full proof. Good On You says the brand does not publish an aggregate breakdown of materials, does not show evidence that it is on track with its science-based target, and does not report results from clothing recycling. It also says there is no evidence of living wages in the supply chain and no proof that the brand minimizes solvent-based chemicals. On animal welfare, Good On You rates ASICS “Not Good Enough” because it uses leather, wool, and down, and its wool policy is not independently verified. The Commons Earth also flags missing information on packaging, responsible rubber, and repair services. Trustpilot results are poor for some ASICS sites, including a 1.5 out of 5 score on the UK site, which points to customer dissatisfaction, though those reviews are about service rather than sustainability.