Good
Although Columbia has taken some steps to reduce its environmental impact, it falls behind industry leaders in measuring and reducing greenhouse gas emissions, utilizing low-impact materials, and offering comprehensive repair services. The brand no longer offers its resale and recycling program, Rethreads, and ended its partnership with Bluesign in 2024, both of which demonstrate a step back from sustainability commitments. However, while it’s far from the most sustainable outdoor brand, Columbia has made progress in reducing packaging waste and increasing transparency through its annual impact report. Here’s where the brand stands now, and where it’s going.
This sustainability analysis evaluates both product- and brand-level initiatives to capture the full scope of Columbia’s efforts to reduce its environmental impact. Our research draws from Columbia’s published sustainability data, other reputable sources, third-party certifications (a cornerstone of our process), and correspondence with brand representatives. We have independently researched over 15 Columbia products to date and counting, giving us a broad understanding of the brand’s use of low-impact materials, chemistry, and manufacturing practices.
For more, visit our Sustainability Index to easily search for information about brands and products in one place.
Columbia receives a “Good,” but not “Excellent,” rating for transparency surrounding its sustainability initiatives. Overall, it provides decent sustainability information on its website and in its annual impact report, although both lack the level of in-depth data offered by brands like Patagonia and Arc’teryx. Because its parent company, Columbia Sportswear Company, publishes an annual impact report that covers all four brands it owns, we found it challenging to locate information specific to Columbia. Columbia Sportswear Company reports on its greenhouse gas data annually, but unfortunately, it does not report on Scope 3 emissions, which constitute the bulk of its total.
Without this information, it is impossible to assess how Columbia’s emissions stack up against other major brands, nor can we determine whether it has made any progress toward reducing emissions. We have received limited responses from representatives when we asked about sustainability, though live chat agents have helped us close gaps in our understanding of the brand. On the whole, Columbia’s transparency has room for improvement.
Compared to industry leaders, Columbia lags in its use of recycled materials. While standout brands like Patagonia and The North Face are steadily moving toward 100% recycled polyester and nylon, Columbia’s most recent reporting (published in 2023) disclosed that it used only 6% recycled polyester. Since then, the brand has not reported its total use of recycled materials, though its 2025 impact report states that recycled content forms “an increasingly large portion” of its materials portfolio. Recycled materials come with a significantly lower carbon footprint than their virgin counterparts and have thus become a key component of many brands’ emissions reduction strategies. Unfortunately, because Columbia doesn’t publish statistics on these materials, we can't confirm the total share these low-impact materials represent.
While many outdoor brands are taking steps toward more sustainable chemistry and reduced-impact manufacturing practices, Columbia has backtracked on its commitment to do so. Columbia was a Bluesign System Partner from 2016 until 2024, but has since ended its formal partnership with the organization. Participation in the Bluesign system ensures textiles and products meet strict standards for chemical safety, emissions, and environmental responsibility. While any brand can source Bluesign-approved fabrics, becoming a System Partner signals a stronger commitment to responsible chemistry, with onsite assessments every two to three years. Columbia still uses Bluesign-approved materials in some of its products (though it has not published a statistic on its total use of these materials since 2017), but usage of these fabrics is limited in the Columbia products we’ve evaluated.
Like many other major outdoor brands, Columbia no longer uses PFAS, or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (sometimes referred to as “forever chemicals”), in its products. PFAS were once the industry standard for durable water-repellent (DWR) treatments and waterproof membranes, but were recently banned in California and New York due to the risks they pose to human health and their environmental persistence. According to the brand’s 2025 restricted substances list, Columbia initiated its PFAS phase-out later than many other brands but made rapid progress in removing the chemicals from its products, starting the process in spring 2024 and completing it by its end-of-year target date. The brand first eliminated PFAS from its OutDry Extreme Eco collection, and all of its products are now PFAS free.
We love that Columbia prioritizes certified, responsibly sourced animal products and natural fibers in its products. Like many outdoor brands, Columbia made the switch to using only Responsible Down Standard-certified down for its virgin down in fall 2016 (excluding its Japan subsidiary), and since 2018, all virgin down used across all regions has been RDS-certified. This standard ensures humane treatment of ducks and geese while improving supply chain traceability.
Additionally, in 2025, Columbia reported that 100% of the leather it used in its apparel, footwear, and gloves was sourced from gold-rated Leather Working Group-certified suppliers. The Leather Working Group evaluates the environmental performance of leather manufacturing facilities, using metrics that include water and energy use, waste and chemical management, among others, to assign a Bronze, Silver, or Gold rating. Columbia’s suppliers meet the highest, Gold-rated tier of this standard. The brand uses only a small amount of wool in its products (typically only socks), but we were unable to verify whether its wool is certified to the Responsible Wool Standard or ZQ Standard.
Many of Columbia’s suppliers are assessed by the International Labour Organization’s Better Work Program, which supports brands in adopting responsible business practices. However, Better Work does not certify factories for responsible practices, so it does not meet our responsible manufacturing criteria. To do so, we require that brands participate in a third-party program that includes annual audits to ensure safe working conditions, fair wages, and a reduced environmental impact. We also require that suppliers be evaluated and scored against specific standards.
Columbia’s partnership does not meet this criterion, but we appreciate that Columbia maintains a factory transparency map showing where its parent company, Columbia Sportswear Company, manufactures its products. The map includes a list of key initiatives associated with various factories, such as Clean by Design and the Carbon Leadership Project. Around 10 of Columbia’s 850 suppliers are located in the US, but because this is a very small fraction of total production, it does not meet our local manufacturing criteria.
Columbia has made a decent effort to reduce its packaging impact, though room for improvement remains. In 2025, the brand shipped its gear in boxes made with a minimum of 95% recycled content, while inner boxes contained at least 80% recycled content. In 2024, its plastic poly bags were made with 50% post-consumer recycled content (up from 10% in 2023), though the brand did not publish an updated figure in 2025. Its in-store retail bags are made with 40% post-consumer recycled content.
Following the lead of another Columbia Sportswear Company brand, Prana, Columbia reduced the size of its poly bags by folding products into smaller shapes. It is also right-sizing its shipping cartons to reduce empty space, and it collects master cartons and poly bags for recycling at its distribution center in Portland, Oregon. Still, other brands we’ve researched have made more substantial improvements, including using Forest Stewardship Council-certified materials, which ensure that paper products are sourced from sustainably managed forests, and eliminating poly bags altogether.
Columbia’s repair offerings are unimpressive when compared to other outdoor brands; still, the brand offers limited services for outerwear and equipment. Repair services can keep your gear in circulation and out of landfills longer, making them a key part of a comprehensive circularity program. Columbia only offers repairs under its warranty program, which covers defects in materials and workmanship. Outerwear and equipment (like sleeping bags and backpacks) are covered under a limited lifetime warranty, while other gear and apparel are covered under a one-year limited warranty. Through its warranty program, it can sometimes repair broken zippers and faulty seams. Still, if a covered item can’t be repaired, the brand issues store credit rather than fixing it, and you are out of luck if your gear is damaged outside of the short, one-year warranty period (which many apparel products, footwear, and accessories are subject to). The brand does not cover wear and tear; only manufacturing defects are covered. Additionally, unlike other brands, Columbia does not publish a menu of the repairs it can perform or data describing how many repairs it completes each year.
Until recently, Columbia offered Rethreads, the brand’s hub for resale and recycling services. When the program was active, you could drop off your old gear at any Columbia store in the U.S. for resale on the platform. Columbia reused unusable items to make cleaning cloths or recycled them into insulation, carpet padding, toy stuffing, or fabric. Unfortunately, the Rethreads program is no longer active. We could not confirm why Columbia terminated the program, a significant step back from supply chain circularity.
Although Columbia completed its first greenhouse gas inventory in 2015 (and began using its current tracking methodology in 2022), it has not yet reported on its Scope 3 (supply chain) emissions, which likely constitute around 95% of the brand’s total emissions. Columbia reports Scope 1 and 2 emissions (emissions from owned assets and purchased electricity), which it estimated in its 2022 impact report account for 5% of total emissions. Unlike most brands in the industry, Columbia has not yet set an emissions reduction target. Additionally, its Scope 1 and 2 emissions rose by more than 4% between 2022 and 2025. In 2025, Columbia reported emitting 31,251 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent from Scope 1 and 2 sources, up from 29,932 tCO2e in 2022. This likely represents only a small fraction of Columbia’s total footprint, however, as it excludes transportation, manufacturing, and materials, which make up most brands’ emissions.
Columbia Sportswear Company’s annual impact report covers the sustainability data of its four-brand portfolio: Columbia, Prana, Mountain Hardwear, and Sorel. The company published its first impact report in 2015 and has released one each year since. While the report covers most of the basic sustainability data we look for, it leaves much to be desired. First, all of the brands’ data is aggregated, making it difficult to assess how much progress each one has made toward sustainable practices. Unlike more comprehensive reports, it skimps on in-depth data describing Columbia’s use of low-impact materials. (For example, its 2025 report no longer includes the brand’s total use of “preferred” materials, which it reported in 2024 without breaking the data down into material types.) The brand’s emissions data excludes Scope 3 emissions, which likely account for the majority of total emissions. All told, the report addresses many of our criteria, but lacks the detail that leading brands offer.
Columbia is a member of the Outdoor Industry Association Climate Action Corps, a collective of outdoor brands working toward cutting the industry’s emissions in half by 2030, and achieving net-zero emissions by 2050. Columbia also partners with the Planet Water Foundation, a nonprofit organization that builds water filtration towers in areas where the brand's products are produced. In 2025, the brand reported that it is over 88% of the way toward achieving its goal of providing clean drinking water to 100,000 people daily by 2028. The company also works with the Collegiate Outdoor Recreation Program, which provides college students with clothing and equipment for getting outside.
![[object Object] photo](https://bettertrail.com/image/object-object-photo?hash=%2F4f8b939880f042eb9b2ddfa09a361cf0%2F96f9654c115e4d7d95b2b0d68dd823f6&width=1920&quality=70&format=auto&fit=scale-down)
Top Rated
Find Sustainable Gear by Brand
Our Sustainability Ratings Explained
These products are among the most sustainable on the market and earn our Better Trail Certified distinction. They often meet 80% or more of our sustainability criteria for their category.
These products are solid, middle-of-the-pack options for sustainability. In general, they meet at least half of our sustainability criteria for their category.
These products are among the least sustainable in their product category and have significant room for improvement. Most meet about 25% or less of our sustainability criteria.
Better Trail Certified Process
The world of sustainability can be murky, but Better Trail is here to help bring clarity. We’ve exhaustively researched thousands of outdoor gear products, communicated with brands, and created a detailed and rigorous ratings system to bring it all together for you. At the pinnacle is Better Trail Certified.
Better Trail Certified products score 4 out of 5 or higher in our sustainability ratings and generally meet around 80% or more of our criteria. While it’s true that no product is 100% sustainable—all take resources to create and arrive at your doorstep—these products are industry leaders and among the most sustainable on the market.
Read More Brand Analyses
Brand Article
How Sustainable is Nemo Equipment?
Brand Article
How Sustainable is REI?
Brand Article
How Sustainable is Stio?
Brand Article
How Sustainable is Patagonia?
Brand Article
How Sustainable is Arc’teryx?
Brand Article
How Sustainable is Black Diamond?
Brand Article
How Sustainable is The North Face?
Brand Article
How Sustainable is Fjallraven?