H&M HOLIDAY TIKTOK AD’S ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT IS EQUIVALENT TO DRIVING HALFWAY AROUND THE GLOBE; 85% OF THE IMPACT COMES FROM THE END-USER DEVICES.

NEW YORK, NY (March 19, 2025) – Recognizing the need for consumer brands to balance advertising goals with environmental responsibility, Glimpact, the first platform for analyzing the overall systemic environmental impact of products and organizations, conducted a study assessing the environmental impact of leading brand’s social media advertisements. This study considered video ads posted on TikTok between November 11th and December 31^st , 2024 by H&M, Burberry, Lululemon, Old Navy, Macy’s, Abercrombie, Ralph Lauren, Zara, and Victoria’s Secret. The Glimpact technology was used to model the impact of these various advertisements according to the new scientific framework of the PEF method. The PEF method, which has been adopted by the EU as the universal method for measuring environmental footprint through the new regulation ESPR, measures environmental footprint comprehensively, considering 16 categories of impact including carbon emissions, water use, land use, etc., and radically changes the vision of environmental impact, revealing the true stakes of the ecological transition.

H&M’s Ad impact is about 14,000 miles by car, while Lululemon & Burberry reach half that
High viewership means higher impact, but looking at the impact of each video on the same playing field reveals disparities and feasible action levers around video specifications

The most environmentally impactful ad of the 9 video campaigns assessed was launched by H&M, which had a total of 8.4 million views. The impact of this digital campaign clocked in at 265,000 micro-points (as defined by the PEF method). This impact score can be thought of as an environmental price - the higher the score, the higher the impact – in this case roughly equal to the impact of driving halfway around the globe. The next highest impact came from the campaigns launched by Lululemon and Burberry, each of which have an environmental impact equivalent to driving the width of the Atlantic Ocean… twice. These video ads were followed in footprint by Zara, Victoria’s secret, and Ralph Lauren. Abercrombie, Macy’s and Old Navy had the most environmentally friendly ads, however none of them had more than 15,000 views at the time of the study.

These initial results and ranking consider the impact of the entire video ad campaign, and it is clear that views relate directly to impact. To better understand the impact of the ad itself, we can look at the footprint by functional unit. A functional unit is a common unit for comparison related to function, in the case of media campaigns, this would be environmental impact for each 1,000 views. By comparing the campaign footprint per 1,000 views, we can accurately compare the impact of each campaign without being influenced by the overall scale of views. This approach helps isolate the effects of elements under brand control, providing a clearer understanding of how different campaigns perform relative to each other. Ultimately, by putting the ads on the same scale with each other, more insights can be gleaned about the action levers available to brands.

Figure 1. Global environmental impact for the entire ad campaign of 9 fashion brands

Figure 1 shows the overall environmental impact of each campaign including consideration of all views on the campaign. Here we see that overall campaign impact scales with views. Old Navy has the lowest overall campaign score of 99 micropoints and the ad received less than 6.5k views. Whereas, H&M has the highest score of 265057 micropoints and received 8.4M views. While figure 1 allows us to better understand the shear impact of an ad campaign at scale, comparison by functional unit as seen in figure 2 allows us to compare the campaigns independently of their reach and glean better insight into the driving forces of impact before largescale distribution. From figure 1 to figure 2, we can see how the hierarchy of the most impactful campaign changes from view dependent to video parameter dependent.

Figure 2. Global Environmental Performance per 1000 views with video weight for each campaign

When impact is observed per 1,000 views, video weight and video length are revealed as clear drivers of a digital ad’s environmental footprint. For example, in figure 2 and clearly illustrated in figure 3, Lululemon is over 100% more impactful than every other campaign and the video weight is also at least 2x the weight of other campaigns. The heavier the file and the longer the video, the worse an ad is for the environment. Video length and weight are related, but resolution plays an important part in video weight as well. These are well within the control of the brands releasing them and can be pivotal the more successful a campaign is.

Figure 3. Environmental Performance per 1000 views vs Video Weight

Climate change accounts for less than a third of overall environmental footprint
With a global vision of environmental footprint, more than 2/3 of the impact comes from other categories including mineral and metal resource use and fossil fuel resource use

A key insight from the results is where the impact is coming from. With the global vision of environmental footprint defined by the PEF method which considers 16 categories of impact, carbon emissions represented only 30-33% of any given campaign’s footprint. While climate change is important, by only focusing on one environmental indicator, two-thirds of the impact is ignored. Other leading contributors to environmental footprint were the mineral and metal resource use, fossil fuel resource use, and particulate matter pollution. This finding emphasizes the importance of using a global vision to assess environmental impact to ensure that the entire scope of the footprint is accounted for, and impact does not get transferred elsewhere as impact reduction measures are taken.

Figure 4. Environmental footprint decomposition by impact category for the H&M Tiktok ad

Devices used to view a video are the leading source of environmental impact
‍The “use” phase of a media campaign contributed 60-90% of overall environmental impact

To evaluate the environmental impact of a digital media campaign, all life cycle stages must be considered. Design, which accounts for impacts related to the planning and production of a media campaign, typically has negligible impacts and is excluded from this study. Creation accounts for the impact from production of all content and is less than 0.5% of overall impact of all the video ads considered. Diffusion accounts for the impact stemming from the spread of the campaign on digital platforms. Use & end of life account for the impacts from the devices used to view the advertisement.

Figure 5. Life cycle stages of a digital ad campaign

For H&M’s campaign, when considering all 8.4 million views, 85% of the overall impact comes from the devices used to watch the campaign. Energy consumption of the user device contributes to 34% of the overall impact, but production and end of life of these devices is the main driver at 51%.  Specifically, numerous finite metal and mineral resources are required for tablet, computer, and smartphone production; the mining and production of these mineral and metal resources alone account for 27% of the overall environmental impact of the entire H&M campaign. When looking at the overall impact from device production and energy use, tablets contribute 10 times more impact than smartphones.

Figure 6. Global Environmental Performance by life cycle stage of an H&M Tiktok video ad

Interestingly, when looking at the various end-user devices used for viewing digital ads, it was uncovered that tablets have the highest environmental impact by far. The environmental impact of a tablet was found to be 6x that of a laptop and 8x higher than that of a smartphone. This is largely because a tablet requires a lot of resources to produce but is used considerably less over its lifespan than a smartphone or a laptop.

Different social media applications have different impacts
‍For the same video, Tiktok performs 10% worse than other platforms

The Glimpact study also measured the impact of the same video from H&M if it were deployed on different apps. With its full-screen video-heavy format, the TikTok advertisement’s environmental impact is almost 10% higher than if the same ad ran on other social media platforms.

Figure 7. Global Environmental Performance by Social Media App for H&M Campaign

Brands have direct and indirect action leverage to reduce the footprint of their campaigns
‍Media campaign impact reduction includes reducing video weight and length, distributing content strategically across different platforms, and educating end-users on best viewing practices

It is clear that the bulk of impact (60%-90% depending on the video ad) is derived from the end-user’s device and out of the control of the advertiser. This means the direct action levers to reduce impact are not readily apparent, but they do exist and can be quite powerful in mitigating impact as campaigns scale. Two such levers that brands concerned about their environmental footprint should focus on are digital ad weight and length. These two factors are the reason that Burberry’s video was more environmentally friendly than Lululemon’s, even though it was viewed by 4 times the amount of people. Reducing Lululemon’s ad weight and length by 25% reduces the overall impact of the campaign by 25%. That is simply shortening from a 55 second video to a 40 second video. Another possibility is for brands to tailor the videos to the platform they are posted on. Deploying short-form, lighter videos on TikTok while saving the long content for YouTube and Facebook can help reduce environmental footprint. Posting a video ad on YouTube has roughly 10% less impact than posting a video ad on TikTok, and at the scale of H&M’s digital ad, this would have reduced the impact by an amount equivalent to driving from Los Angeles to Austin.

At the end of the day, the bulk of environmental impact from a digital ad campaign comes from the consumption of the video on different devices, and correspondingly the scale of the impact relates to how much it is viewed. Here, advertisers have the opportunity to get creative about how they present their media campaigns. Since tablets are about 8 times more impactful than phones, urging consumers to watch on a phone rather than a tablet can be a great way for eco-conscious brands to educate and work cooperatively with their customers while also acknowledging the impact of ads. Advertiser’s first step in reducing their impact is understanding their footprint to identify the most relevant action levers. Thanks to this study, now advertisers have the tools to do so.

“The environmental footprint of brands’ digital ad campaigns often goes overlooked, but it is substantial. Brands need to acknowledge this impact and assess it with a systemic approach. In this way, they can understand where their impact comes from, identify the real stakes of the ecological transition, and act credibly and effectively to contribute to a resolution for the environmental crisis,” stated Christophe Girardier, Co-Founder and CEO of Glimpact.

About this Study

This study was performed to analyze the environmental impact of video advertisements. The advertisements chosen for this study were published by H&M, Burberry, Lululemon, Old Navy, Macy’s, Abercrombie, Ralph Lauren, Zara, and Victoria’s Secret. This study considered the environmental impact of video ads published on TikTok between November 11th and December 31^st 2024; ad engagement statistics were recorded between January 9^th and January 11^th 2025. This study was performed using the Glimpact technology, which has the capability of modelling the environmental impact of a media campaign across its entire life cycle, according to the Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) method. For more information on the framework for this study, evaluating the environmental impact of media campaigns, or the Glimpact SaaS platform, please contact the Glimpact team.