Behind the Glamour: The Hidden Environmental Costs of Celebrity-Owned Brands

Balancing Fame with Responsibility: How Celebrity Brands Are Impacting the Environment and What Consumers Can Do

In the glamorous world of celebrities and their brands, many fans eagerly look to their favorite stars for inspiration on how to dress, travel, and care for their skin. However, a recent study conducted by the custom packaging company Arka reveals that the environmental impact of celebrity-founded brands is significant and complex. The February 2026 report assesses the fashion and beauty industries and ranks brands based on various factors, including carbon emissions, supply chain practices, and approaches to sustainability. This comprehensive analysis provides insights into how celebrities can wield their influence for both good and bad in the arena of environmental responsibility.

Arka's study calculated the carbon footprint of each brand by examining its emissions per unit of product and per dollar earned. This allowed for an equitable assessment of both luxury and mass-market brands. Scores were assigned on a scale from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating greater environmental harm. As the findings emerged, some surprising names topped the list of least sustainable brands, revealing that even the most fashionable labels can carry an unexpected burden on the planet.

The Row, created by Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen, received the dubious distinction of being the least sustainable celebrity brand. With an astounding carbon emission rate of nearly 500 kilograms for each item sold, the brand’s luxury status comes with a hefty environmental price. Despite its annual sale of approximately 22,700 pieces, The Row generates more than 10,000 tons of carbon emissions each year due to the materials and craftsmanship involved in producing its high-priced garments, which can average above $3,000 each. This high level of resource use and carbon intensity propelled The Row to a concerning score of 48.7 on Arka's index, illustrating that luxury fashion can indeed have a severe ecological footprint.

Following closely behind, Kim Kardashian’s SKIMS ranks as the third least sustainable brand, contributing the highest total emissions among celebrity-founded companies. The brand’s vast production scale leads to over 136,000 tons of carbon emissions yearly, caused by the sale of nearly 20 million units and a staggering revenue of $1 billion. While SKIMS’ carbon footprint per product is lower than that of The Row—around 7 kilograms per item—the sheer volume of units sold amplifies its total environmental impact. This highlights a vital point in the study: mass-market successes can result in massive emissions, making it essential for consumers to consider the broader picture.

Shay Mitchell's Béis Travel received the second spot on the least sustainable list, with its products generating 65 kilograms of emissions per item. The travel goods industry typically requires more material and involves heavier shipping, which increases environmental costs. Sadly, the brand hasn’t performed well in human sustainability metrics either and lacks significant third-party certifications that could attest to its eco-friendliness. This raises questions about ethical production within the celebrity brand landscape and the responsibilities that come with a significant public platform.

Other notable names found in the top five include Rihanna’s Fenty Beauty and Kate Hudson’s Fabletics. While beauty products tend to have a lower environmental impact per item than fashion, their cumulative annual emissions can still be considerable due to high sales volumes. The presence of such brands on the list reflects an important nuance: even those perceived as modern and inclusive struggle to balance popularity with sustainability. This underscores the growing importance of transparency, ethical sourcing, and sustainable materials among the most celebrated labels, urging consumers to think critically about their purchasing choices.

With the clothing industry being responsible for about 10% of global carbon emissions—more than international flights and shipping combined—the impact of celebrity brands cannot be overlooked. The high-profile status of these creators gives them the power and responsibility to reshape industry norms, encouraging sustainable practices in a sector that desperately needs reform. Thankfully, consumers are becoming increasingly conscientious about their purchasing decisions, with 55% of Americans now checking if products are eco-friendly before making a purchase. This shift toward environmental accountability presents an opportunity for celebrity brands to reevaluate their impact on the planet and adopt more sustainable practices.

As consumers navigate a world filled with celebrity brands, it becomes increasingly crucial to look beyond mere aesthetics and price. Transparent supply chains, the use of sustainable materials, and verified certifications are valuable indicators of a brand’s commitment to environmental responsibility. Whether one’s loyalty lies with high-profile fashion icons or beauty moguls, understanding the ecological implications of endorsing such brands will promote a more sustainable future. The allure of celebrity brands may be undeniable; however, it’s vital for consumers to be mindful of the environmental costs that can accompany their favorite labels. The opportunity to support brands that genuinely prioritize sustainability exists, shaping a future where fashion and beauty can be both stylish and respectful of our planet.