Comparative Implications of Decarbonization of Luxury: Emission Profile and Strategic Limitations
Research Article
Open Access
CC BY

Comparative Implications of Decarbonization of Luxury: Emission Profile and Strategic Limitations

Mohan Shi 1*
1 University of Glasgow
*Corresponding author: 3023252S@student.gla.ac.uk
Published on 24 September 2025
Journal Cover
AEMPS Vol.219
ISSN (Print): 2754-1177
ISSN (Online): 2754-1169
ISBN (Print): 978-1-80590-387-1
ISBN (Online): 978-1-80590-388-8
Download Cover

Abstract

The paper compares carbon footprint structures and decarbonization plans of the four most popular luxury conglomerates (LVMH, Kering, Prada, Richemont) based on Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) reports. Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) disclosures, and financial reports (2019-2024). The main findings are as follows: (1) Carbon intensity( tCO2/e Million euros revenue) has a multifaceted connection with revenue growth: whereas LVMH and Prada recorded absolute decoupling (decrease of intensity with growth of revenues), Kering reported steadier increase in intensity using first-order volume scaling and not supply-chain innovation, corroborating H1 with reservations regarding its applicability to all corporations, and overriding H2; (2) Scope 3 emissions (encompassing 68%-90% of Decarbonization will need to implement selective transparency mechanisms (i.e. permissioned blockchain) as well as commercialization of high cost abatement technology (i.e. bio-based material) through high-end product lines with policy supportive supplier capacity building to deal with the collective action problems of Scope 3. The tools of regulation such as Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD)/Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) should be supplemented with the transition support to avoid displacement of suppliers.

Keywords:

Luxury goods, Carbon intensity, Scope 3, Decarbonization, Stakeholder theory

View PDF
Shi,M. (2025). Comparative Implications of Decarbonization of Luxury: Emission Profile and Strategic Limitations. Advances in Economics, Management and Political Sciences,219,45-51.

References

[1]. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.

[2]. Achabou, M. A., & Dekhili, S. (2013). Luxury and sustainable development: Is there a match? Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 1896–1903.

[3]. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman.

[4]. Bocken, N. M. P., & Short, S. W. (2021). Unsustainable business models—Recognising and resolving institutionalised social and environmental harm. Journal of Cleaner Production, 312, 127828.

[5]. Kapferer, J. N., & Michaut-Denizeau, A. (2020). Are luxury and sustainability truly compatible? A critical review of the literature. Luxury: History, Culture, Consumption, 7(1), 1–23.

[6]. Gardetti, M. Á., & Muthu, S. S. (Eds.). (2020). Sustainable luxury and social entrepreneurship: Stories from the pioneers. Springer.

[7]. Joy, A., Sherry Jr., J. F., Venkatesh, A., Wang, J., & Chan, R. (2012). Fast fashion, sustainability, and the ethical appeal of luxury brands. Fashion Theory, 16(3), 273–295.

[8]. Pedersen, E. R. G., & Andersen, K. R. (2015). Sustainability innovators and anchor draggers: A global expert study on sustainable fashion. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 19(3), 315–327.Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman.

[9]. Turker, D., & Altuntas, C. (2014). Sustainable supply chain management in the fast fashion industry: An analysis of corporate reports. European Management Journal, 32(5), 837–849.

[10]. Santos, G., Mendes, F., Pinto, L., & Lindgreen, A. (2022). Sustainable business models in the fashion industry: A systematic literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 347, 131220.

[11]. Henninger, C. E., Alevizou, P. J., & Oates, C. J. (2017). What is sustainable fashion? Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 21(4), 400–416.

[12]. Perry, P., & Towers, N. (2013). Conceptual framework development: CSR implementation in fashion supply chains. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 43(5–6), 478–501. PST

[13]. Arrigo, E. (2020). Corporate responsibility management in fast fashion companies: The Gap Inc. case. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 24(3), 407–427.

[14]. LVMH. (2023). Environmental, Social and Governance Report 2023. Paris: LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton SE.

[15]. Kering. (2023). Sustainability Progress Report 2023. Paris: Kering Group.

[16]. Prada. (2023). ESG Report 2023. Milan: Prada S.p.A.

[17]. Richemont. (2023). Sustainability Report 2023/24. Geneva: Compagnie Financière Richemont SA.

References

[1]. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.

[2]. Achabou, M. A., & Dekhili, S. (2013). Luxury and sustainable development: Is there a match? Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 1896–1903.

[3]. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman.

[4]. Bocken, N. M. P., & Short, S. W. (2021). Unsustainable business models—Recognising and resolving institutionalised social and environmental harm. Journal of Cleaner Production, 312, 127828.

[5]. Kapferer, J. N., & Michaut-Denizeau, A. (2020). Are luxury and sustainability truly compatible? A critical review of the literature. Luxury: History, Culture, Consumption, 7(1), 1–23.

[6]. Gardetti, M. Á., & Muthu, S. S. (Eds.). (2020). Sustainable luxury and social entrepreneurship: Stories from the pioneers. Springer.

[7]. Joy, A., Sherry Jr., J. F., Venkatesh, A., Wang, J., & Chan, R. (2012). Fast fashion, sustainability, and the ethical appeal of luxury brands. Fashion Theory, 16(3), 273–295.

[8]. Pedersen, E. R. G., & Andersen, K. R. (2015). Sustainability innovators and anchor draggers: A global expert study on sustainable fashion. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 19(3), 315–327.Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman.

[9]. Turker, D., & Altuntas, C. (2014). Sustainable supply chain management in the fast fashion industry: An analysis of corporate reports. European Management Journal, 32(5), 837–849.

[10]. Santos, G., Mendes, F., Pinto, L., & Lindgreen, A. (2022). Sustainable business models in the fashion industry: A systematic literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 347, 131220.

[11]. Henninger, C. E., Alevizou, P. J., & Oates, C. J. (2017). What is sustainable fashion? Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 21(4), 400–416.

[12]. Perry, P., & Towers, N. (2013). Conceptual framework development: CSR implementation in fashion supply chains. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 43(5–6), 478–501. PST

[13]. Arrigo, E. (2020). Corporate responsibility management in fast fashion companies: The Gap Inc. case. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 24(3), 407–427.

[14]. LVMH. (2023). Environmental, Social and Governance Report 2023. Paris: LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton SE.

[15]. Kering. (2023). Sustainability Progress Report 2023. Paris: Kering Group.

[16]. Prada. (2023). ESG Report 2023. Milan: Prada S.p.A.

[17]. Richemont. (2023). Sustainability Report 2023/24. Geneva: Compagnie Financière Richemont SA.

Cite this article

Shi,M. (2025). Comparative Implications of Decarbonization of Luxury: Emission Profile and Strategic Limitations. Advances in Economics, Management and Political Sciences,219,45-51.

Data availability

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study will be available from the authors upon reasonable request.

About volume

Volume title: Proceedings of ICFTBA 2025 Symposium: Financial Framework's Role in Economics and Management of Human-Centered Development

ISBN: 978-1-80590-387-1(Print) / 978-1-80590-388-8(Online)
Editor: Lukáš Vartiak, Habil. Florian Marcel Nuţă
Conference website: https://2025.icftba.org/Galati.html
Conference date: 17 October 2025
Series: Advances in Economics, Management and Political Sciences
Volume number: Vol.219
ISSN: 2754-1169(Print) / 2754-1177(Online)

© 2024 by the author(s). Licensee EWA Publishing, Oxford, UK. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license. Authors who publish this series agree to the following terms:

1. Authors retain copyright and grant the series right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this series.

2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the series's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this series.

3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See Open access policy for details).

For authors
For editors
For reviewers

Cookies are used by this site.
Copyright © 2024 EWA Publishing, its licensors, and contributors. All rights reserved, including text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.