Good
Smith has implemented several initiatives to reduce its environmental impact, a notable achievement given its focus on hard goods like ski goggles, sunglasses, and helmets. (Sustainability advancements are typically less pronounced in those categories than in outdoor apparel.) The brand, which is a subsidiary of the Safilo Group, has goals to increase its use of recycled materials and packaging and decrease its absolute carbon footprint. Still, there is room for improvement in areas such as transparency around Smith’s manufacturing practices, disclosure of PFAS use, and the availability of repair services. Here’s a look at how Smith is trimming its environmental footprint, and where it’s aiming to go next.
This sustainability analysis evaluates both product- and brand-level initiatives to capture the full scope of Smith's efforts to reduce its environmental impact. Our research draws from Smith's published sustainability data, third-party certifications (a cornerstone of our process), and correspondence with brand representatives. We have independently researched over a dozen Smith products to date and counting, giving us a broad understanding of the brand’s use of low-impact materials, chemistry, and manufacturing practices.
You can explore our analyses of other outdoor brands, or use our advanced search to find products that align with your sustainability values.
Smith earns a “Good” rating for sustainability transparency, though there is room for improvement, and it falls short of brands with an Excellent rating. While Smith shares limited sustainability information on its website, its parent company, Safilo Group, publishes an annual impact report covering all subsidiaries. The report provides valuable insights on initiatives like sustainable materials and greenhouse gas tracking, but offers few details specific to Smith. On the product level, Smith provides clear labeling, often indicating material composition and recycled content percentages. However, it fails to indicate whether water-resistant products are PFAS free. Additionally, Smith has not responded to our inquiries regarding its sustainability practices. All in all, Smith’s transparency is better than some brands, but it doesn’t top our list.
As a manufacturer of primarily hard goods, Smith is ahead of many other brands in incorporating recycled materials, though its use remains more limited than that of apparel-focused companies. Using recycled materials in products like ski helmets is particularly challenging due to strict safety standards, and end-of-life recycling is complicated because many helmets combine multiple materials that are difficult to separate. Smith’s Rodeo Ski Helmet is the only helmet in our research that contains recycled materials, with 30% recycled content. Smith also uses recycled materials in some of its microfiber bags for sunglasses and goggles. On the apparel side, the brand has some hats, shorts, socks, and bags made from recycled nylon and polyester.
Smith does not publish an overall percentage of its products that contain recycled materials. However, the Safilo Group is tracking that stat for its entire portfolio. It reports that 23% of new collections across all of its brands were made with recycled or bio-based materials in 2024. This push is part of its bigger initiative to reduce the company’s carbon footprint.
Smith is not a Bluesign System partner, and none of the products we have researched from the company contain Bluesign-approved materials. Participation in the Bluesign system guarantees that textiles and products adhere to rigorous standards for chemical management, emissions control, and overall environmental impact. While many brands can purchase Bluesign-approved materials, achieving System Partner status demonstrates a deeper commitment to safe chemistry and sustainability, backed by onsite audits conducted every two to three years. While it is less common for sunglasses, goggles, or helmets to be made using Bluesign-approved materials, Smith could use them in its apparel, including shorts, bags, and shirts.
Unlike many outdoor industry brands, it’s difficult to find any information on whether Smith or the Safilo Group has phased out PFAS chemicals. While Smith doesn’t produce the types of products most commonly associated with PFAS, such as rain jackets or ski pants, it does label several of its bags as water resistant, and such coatings have historically contained PFAS. However, Smith does not specify whether those coatings are PFAS free. Overall, PFAS-free chemistries are discussed far less in hard goods categories like ski goggles and helmets than in apparel, even though some sunglasses and goggles may still use PFAS in their anti-fog or water-repellent coatings. In Safilo’s past impact reports, it mentions having a restricted substances list, but we were unable to find a public copy of the list, and do not know if PFAS are on it or not.
Smith has not publicly shared specific goals regarding the use of low-impact materials, though several of its sunglasses, apparel items, and one helmet incorporate recycled content. The Safilo Group reported that 23% of new collections in 2024 were made with recycled or bio-based materials, with a target to reach 25% in 2025. However, each of those products does not necessarily contain 100% recycled or bio-based materials—they include products containing at least 30% recycled content in this statistic. Safilo defines bio-based materials as those that come from renewable biological sources, such as plants. Some of the bio-based materials used in its products include castor oil and different types of rubber.
To meet our responsible manufacturing criteria, we require brands to engage in third-party certification programs that conduct annual audits to verify safe labor practices, fair compensation, and responsible environmental management. In addition, suppliers must be assessed and rated according to defined sustainability and ethical performance standards. We know that Smith owns and operates a factory in Clearfield, Utah, and brands can also meet our criteria if they produce the bulk of their products in the U.S. This is due to strict labor and environmental regulations and (typically) a lower carbon footprint from reduced transportation between factories compared to global networks. However, we have been unable to confirm how much of the company’s production occurs in Utah or what regulations or standards are in place at that facility. Therefore, Smith does not meet our criteria for responsible manufacturing. Some Safilo subsidiary brands have factories that are certified to various standards from the International Organization for Standardization. However, we do not believe this is the case for Smith’s manufacturing.
In 2022, Smith discontinued the use of plastic across all new packaging for winter sports and eyewear products. This included the removal of plastic windows on goggle boxes and plastic bags that were used for lens protection. This has saved 1 million plastic bags annually across goggles and 1.2 million across helmets. Through a partnership with Gogglesoc, all MAG series Smith goggles also include a 2-in-1 cleaning cloth and lens protector made from recycled water bottles. Additionally, all of its packaging is Forest Stewardship Council-certified. The Forest Stewardship Council ensures that wood and paper materials come from responsibly managed forests that safeguard ecosystems, limit climate impacts, minimize chemical inputs, and uphold fair treatment of workers and Indigenous communities.
Smith offers repair services for its products that are still covered under warranty, which only covers manufacturing defects. This is common among brands that sell primarily hard goods such as helmets, sunglasses, and goggles. Those items are also more challenging to repair than other gear categories, such as rain jackets and down jackets. However, Smith offers a range of replacement lenses for its ski goggles and sunglasses directly on its website—a great way to extend the life of eyewear and keep it out of landfills when lenses get scratched.
Unlike many outdoor brands, Smith does not offer a resale or recycling program for used gear. This isn’t unusual for a company focused primarily on eyewear and ski helmets—products that are rarely resold. Helmets, for instance, are generally not resold due to safety concerns, while sunglasses and goggles tend to show wear that makes secondhand sales less viable. While it wouldn’t be impossible for Smith to implement a resale program, such initiatives are inherently more challenging for hard goods than for apparel.
The Safilo Group tracks its greenhouse gas emissions across all of its subsidiary brands. Safilo has Science Based Targets Initiative (SBTi)-verified goals to reduce Scope 1 and 2 emissions by 70% by 2030 and Scope 3 emissions by 25% by 2030, all compared to a 2022 baseline. Scope 1 emissions come from sources a company directly owns or controls, while Scope 2 emissions are indirect emissions, like purchased electricity, heating, and cooling. Scope 3 emissions include all other indirect emissions across the value chain, such as those from suppliers, transportation, manufacturing, and more. SBTi-verified targets ensure reduction goals are in line with the Paris Climate Agreement. Safilo has identified many ways in which the company hopes to achieve these goals. To start, it hopes to use 100% renewable electricity for their energy needs by 2030. It also intends to upgrade its heating and cooling systems to more energy-efficient options and transition their shipping to sea instead of air, which has lower emissions per ton-mile.
Since Safilo’s baseline emissions tracking year of 2022, it has made progress in decreasing Scope 1,2, and 3 emissions. This is notable, since we have not seen many brands make Scope 3 emissions absolute reductions, which is also where most of a brand’s impact comes from. The company decreased its Scope 1 and 2 emissions to 4,536 tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO2e) in 2024 from 16,337 tCO2e in 2022. Similarly, its scope 3 emissions decreased from 116,158 tCO2e in 2022 to 104,129 tCO2e in 2024. However, since Smith does not disclose its own emissions data, it’s unclear what portion of the Safilo Group’s total emissions the brand contributes.
While the Safilo Group publishes an annual impact report, Smith does not publish one of its own. Safilo’s report highlights some of Smith’s sustainability initiatives, but the coverage is less detailed than what we’ve seen from other parent companies. That said, Safilo’s documentation of its carbon emissions is notably comprehensive, providing year-over-year Scope 1, 2, and 3 data with clear categorization and measurable progress toward absolute reduction goals, something few brands achieve. The report also touches on responsible material use, packaging, and other initiatives, though without brand-level breakdowns, it’s difficult to determine how much specifically applies to Smith.
We could not find any significant partnerships Smith has with other organizations; however, the company has contributed to smaller environmental efforts. For example, the company blogged about participating in an Earth Day clean-up project both at their headquarters in Utah and in Portland, Oregon. The company also blogged about supporting Project Zero, a carbon-neutral expedition based in Iceland aimed at raising awareness and action for environmental responsibility. This expedition culminated in the creation of a film called Silent Rebellion.
Top Rated
Find Sustainable Gear by Brand
Deep Dive
Explore Smith Gear
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 Fjallraven?
Brand Article
How Sustainable is Stio?
Brand Article
How Sustainable is Black Diamond?
Brand Article
How Sustainable is Arc’teryx?
Brand Article
How Sustainable is REI?
Brand Article
How Sustainable is Columbia?
Brand Article
How Sustainable is Nemo Equipment?
Brand Article
How Sustainable is The North Face?
Brand Article
How Sustainable is Patagonia?