Improving sustainability in global supply chains with private certification standards: testing an approach for assessing their performance and impact potential

Abstract

Sustainable supply chain governance approaches aim for improvement of environmental and community living conditions at the developing country's side of the global supply chains. Impact evaluation in remote and multiple sourcing countries is hardly done in practice because of its complexity and costs. Evaluating the impact potential with this methodology enables an easier route for assessing and comparing the fast growing number of standard systems. This article describes a methodology for assessing the system performance and impact potential of 'sustainable supply chain governance (SSCG) systems' and uses two cases of certifying sustainable products in the coffee sector (Fairtrade and Utz Certified) for verification of the method. The approach rests on the assumption that a certification system can have substantial impact reduction if it is well organised in its content and organisation: the governance system impact potential (GSIP). Two exemplary pilot cases show that changes made over the years in both systems are directly visible with the methodology and it can be used for monitoring the progress in markets for sustainable products.

Sustainable supply chain management in developing countries: An analysis of the literature

“…When talking about assessment, it is found that the purpose of some certifications is to standardize products and processes, thereby creating mass markets and price-based competition. Other standards aim to differentiate the products, thus establishing niche markets based on quality as a form of non-price competition (Bloom, 2015;Dolan, 2008;Vermeulen and Metselaar, 2015). In developing countries, voluntary sustainability standards primarily reach the export-oriented sectors.…”

Impacts of private sustainability certification on practices of tea production in Tamilnadu, India

“…It would be good to have a more detailed analysis of full costs and benefits of a small selection of cases from both groups. Also a more detailed analysis of the differences between the various standards might be fruitful (Vermeulen and Metselaar, 2015).…”

Practices of Third Wave Coffee: A Burundian Producer's Perspective

“…This is a strategic opportunity, as there is a shortage of exemplary material quality coffee available in the global coffee market (Daviron and Ponte, 2005;Watts, 2013). Whilst there is a significant body of sustainability-oriented research and debate on the development possibilities derived from the symbolic quality attributes of coffee (Bacon, 2005;Blackman and Rivera, 2011;Elder et al, 2014;Giovannucci and Ponte, 2005;Hudson and Hudson, 2003;ITC, 2011b;Lyons, 2005;Ponte, 2004;Raynolds et al, 2007;Vermeulen and Metselaar, 2015), less attention has been paid to how the material quality attributes of coffee are involved in the sustainable coffee discourse (Borrella et al, 2015;Goldstein, 2011;Wilson and Wilson, 2014). 'Cup quality' is the term that coffee professionals and aficionados use to refer to material quality (Steiman, 2013;Sunarharum et al, 2014;Wilson and Wilson, 2014).…”