‘Green’ Procurement: Getting its ‘Value Creation’ Game On to Drive Supply Chain Sustainability (Part 2)

In Part 1 of this series on sustainable procurement, I laid out my vision of the heart of a sustainable, green supply chain that runs through its procurement function.  It’s simple to show how every product has a hidden human health, environmental and social impact along the entire supply chain.  However, it’s been challenging to bring sustainable procurement into a central decision making role in line with organizational business goals.  The results to date have been a mixed bag, as I alluded to when I mentioned Aribas new Vision 2020 report and companion dialoguing process, now underway.

Sustainable Procurement: back to management!

On the heels of the Ariba effort comes a promising benchmark report recently released by HEC-Paris and Ecovadis. Entitled “Sustainable Procurement: back to management!” this study (available for download on Ecovadis’ site) has risen to rescue and tempered my fears of devolving sustainable procurement.  In fact, the report may suggest a positive “tipping point” in favor of sustainable procurement.  The efforts behind the 2011 edition of the HEC/EcoVadis Sustainable Procurement Benchmark were carried out between the fall of 2010 and early 2011.  This benchmarking process started in 2003 and the 5th conducted since that time.

The objective of the benchmark is to provide a snapshot on what’s trending in the area of Sustainable Procurement practices.  According to the authors, the following overarching questions were explored:

• How has the vision of the Chief Procurement Officers (CPOs) evolved?
• What tools and initiatives seem to be the most effective over time to drive changes?
• How is Sustainable Procurement progress measured?
• What are the remaining challenges faced by most Procurement organizations?

The study identified three main drivers behind Sustainable Procurement initiatives: Risk Management, Value Creation, and Cost Reduction.  These findings mirror some of the trending areas and critical issues identified in the Ariba report.  HEC and Ecovadis suggested that these three drivers’ shows that many organizations are now facing new expectations in terms of Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainability from the Procurement Departments of their clients and, suggest that having a sustainable procurement program in place can become a competitive advantage.

 Sustainable Procurement Remains High on Executives Agenda

1. 92% of the surveyed Companies consider Sustainable Procurement a “critical” or “important” initiative, even though for the 1st time this year, “Risk Management” took over as a priority initiative.
2. The major progress made in 2011 is on the support from the Top Management (+24%) thus demonstrating that Sustainable Procurement is attracting more and more interest from Executive Committees, and significant progress was made in implementation of tools and organizational changes.
3.  Significant organizational changes have been implemented: 45% of companies already have “dedicated teams” and 57% report having trained a majority of procurement staff on Sustainability.
4. Whereas in 2007 only 1/3 of companies were using formalized methodologies for assessing their suppliers’ sustainability performance, in 2011 two-thirds of them are now implementing dedicated tools (either internal or leveraging 3rd parties).
5. Finally 92% companies have increased (56%) or maintained (36%) their budgets related to Sustainable Procurement, which should yield more changes in the future years.

Tools for Sustainable Procurement on the Rise

The HEC/Ecovadis study found that basic tools such as “Suppliers Code of Conduct” ,  “CSR contract clauses” and “Suppliers self-assessment“ were now the rule rather than the exception among companies surveyed by a ratio of 2 to 1,  but interestingly were still found to  limited value in terms of risk management.  What I found encouraging was that the study found maturation in the types of tools used, including “Supplier Audits” and “Supplier CSR information databases“.  This type of work has clearly been evident in what I have reported in the past, especially among multi-national companies with contractor manufacturing operations in developing economies (like China, India and Brazil).  These advanced tools offered more opportunities for suppliers to engage directly with buyers, allow for data verification, and offer direct recommendations for supplier CSR and sustainability improvement.  Over half of the companies surveyed had advanced to this next level.  Finally, when asked what the most effective uses of resources were in developing a Sustainable Procurement Program, respondents mentioned 1) top level support, 2) creation of cross functional teams and 3) training, as key success ingredients.   All three of these success factors had shown substantial improvement over the past several benchmark cycles, according to the study.

Sustainable Procurement Creates Value

This is not the first study that has come along that demonstrates value and return on investment from sustainable procurement.  I wrote earlier of a joint study by Ecovadis, INSEAD and PriceWaterhouseCoopers that demonstrated similar results.  In that study, payback from most green procurement activities was huge. Companies surveyed were able to benefit quickly from risk management reduction and potential revenue growth opportunities, due in part to sustainable procurement.  The study also found that there were additional ‘value creation’ opportunities that could be realized if procurement departments collaborated more closely with the marketing and R&D departments upstream on the projects.

Also, a study in 2009 by a company named BrainNet (Green and Sustainable Procurement: Drivers and Approaches”)  looked at sustainable procurement and value creation and found that “… procurement with an ecological and social conscience is not a cost factor, but a value factor…Companies that pursue a consistent approach to green and sustainable procurement receive an above-average return on capital deployed.”  The study produced what they describe as an “evolution curve for sustainable procurement” that describes the maturity of various approaches of sustainable procurement.  This curve compares well with the most recent EcoVadis/HEC findings and suggests that there may be a widening gap between leaders and laggards.

Sustainable ‘green’ procurement embraces a holistic approach, one that encompasses organization, people, process, and technology to create greater product value along the entire supply chain.  This type of value creation can managed by establishing firm triple bottom line based metrics from upstream suppliers to downstream users and using the procurement function to support product and process innovation and accounting for total cost of ownership (TCO).

What’s Next?

According to the most recent HEC/EcoVadis benchmark report, it is clear that new green and social business models depend upon innovation, and a gap still among many organizations to implement a truly Sustainable Procurement vision.  This was clearly in evidence by the lack of mentions by Chief Procurement Officers that I discussed last week in the Ariba study.

The HEC/Ecovadis report suggests that when implementing Sustainable Procurement practices, a three phase process can get the ball rolling, starting first by orienting and energizing the procurement function through:

“1. Communication activities: Building awareness among employees regarding the approaching change, the benefits and the steps to be implemented.

2. Training and Performance support: ensuring that the initiative is being understood among those who are to execute the change or be part of it, and leading to buy-in of the key stakeholders.

3. Rewards and recognition: ensuring that employees – and suppliers – who embrace change are properly recognized and rewarded. This final step is when implementation is not only measured, but also celebrated.”

I’m going to say it again…and again. All sustainable business roads lead through the procurement function.  The procurement function is the perfect nexus and a critical organizational player that touches product designers, engineers, multiple tiers of suppliers and subcontractors, manufacturing operations, logistical warehousing and distribution and the end users.  Yes indeed, things are looking up for sustainable procurement…it’s ‘game on’.

A Systems Perspective on Sustainability, Supply Chain Management- The Intelligent Choice

As we approach the mid-point in 2011, the tea leaves of the economic recovery have ‘sustainability’ in supply chain planning and management firming up as a key “rebuilding” block in company activities.  Two recent studies from two different continents bear that notion out.  First, consultancy BearingPoint Ireland has released a report which says two-thirds of companies surveyed in Europe believe that a green supply chain is a strategic priority. The report, entitled Green Supply Chain: from awareness to action, is the fourth of a series of “supply chain monitors” from the private consultancy.  The study was conducted among about 600 European decision-makers by Novamétrie between 2010 and 2011, with a position within Supply Chain, Sustainable Development or Industrial Divisions.   Key industries captured includes: consumer goods, transportation, construction, automotive, industrial goods, retail, energy and utilities, chemicals, IT/electronics and pharmaceuticals, among others.

The goal of the report, according to the authors was to summarize “the evolution over the past two years in terms of mindset, maturity and actions efficiency [and] explores the green Supply Chain practices in Europe, in order to identify the significant improvements in the most representative industries. The results clearly underline a growing interest of executive managements in developing products with a low environmental impact. What was seen as a constraint is now considered as an opportunity.”

Executive Management Mandates, Reputational Risk Management Are Key Drivers

A notable “inflexion” occurred between this survey round and prior surveys.  For instance, in 2008, findings suggested that supply chain ‘greening’ was primarily being driven by important environmental and regulatory developments (such as REACH, WEE, RoHS or the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme).  Now, with compliance programs associated with these initiatives firmly entrenched or in initial development, the drivers appear to be shifting toward meeting internal executive management commitments and addressing reputation management and/or consumer demands.  In other words, according to the report, “Environmental actions presently address new constraints and motives, which are more mature and integrated to companies’ decision processes.” Key findings from BearingPoint’s report include:

• 70% of surveyed companies declare that green Supply Chain is a true economical lever.
• For 47% of the companies, the return on investment of a green Supply Chain is reached within 3 years.
• More than half of European companies now use environmental criteria to assess their Supply Chain performance: share of recycled packaging material, CO2 emissions.
• Two-thirds of companies adopted or plan to adopt a green policy for their purchases.
• Manufacturers must be able to measure and reduce their carbon footprint if they are to succeed on export markets
• Over half of the respondents in the survey said they did not renew contracts with suppliers who did not respect their green charter.
• Buyers are preferably choosing suppliers with certified processes such as ISO 14001.

According to Bearing Points recent press release, Irish Exporters Association chief executive, John Whelan, said: “There is no question that Irish businesses which produce transparently environmentally positive products, delivered by carbon neutral logistics services will succeed on international markets.”

Sustainability Drivers Both Inside and Out the ‘Four Walls’

In yet another study, Prime Advantage, a buying consortium for midsized manufacturers, unveiled its seventh (2011) Prime Advantage Group Outlook (GO) Survey.  This survey queried small and midsized North American manufacturers, and found that more than 80 percent of North American companies surveyed indicated that they developing more sustainable or energy-efficient products largely driven by customer requirements and compliance regulations.  According to the study, “the biggest driving factors behind these changes are customer requirements (80 percent), followed by compliance regulations (53 percent) and shareholder directives (12 percent). In addition, 57 percent of respondents have also started buying more sustainable indirect products for internal consumption.”

A Systems Perspective Breeds Competitive Intelligence

The Bearing Point study made a statement that caught my eye and for which I wholeheartedly agree.  Identifying with a systems-based mindset that recognizes the intrinsic and realized value sustainability-focused business management is a critical fulcrum for green supply chain practices. I noted in a post last fall that The Fifth Discipline and The Necessary Revolution author Peter Senge argued (in the October Harvard Business Review) that to make progress on environmental issues, organizations must understand that they’re part of a larger system. Senge also makes a great point that companies will be in a better competitive position if they understand the larger system that they operate within and to work with people you haven’t worked with before.

I’ve cited companies like Hewlett-Packard and Danisco as supply chain innovators in their product sectors.  These companies, among other innovators like Intel, P&G, IBM, GE and others, who’ve viewed supply chain in a systematic or holistic manner, organizations successfully have been applying that “big-picture thinking” needed to be truly innovative. Doing so can create leverage points that companies never realized they had before with their suppliers.

Clearly, the environmental (and often the social) footprint of a product extends beyond the four walls of the company who “brands” the product.  This footprint extends upstream and downstream, and must capture, control or influence inputs and outputs all along the way.  Some of the largest footprints (like energy and carbon) lie upstream or in the final hands of the consumers.  This is why leading companies are rethinking the global extents of their supply chains, exploring local sourcing options and implementing other operational efficiencies.

The results of the recent surveys indicate that companies in a wide number of sectors are waking up to the fact that sustainability is more than business innovation- it’s business intelligence.

Collaborative Competition + Sustainability = The 21st Century Supply Chain Solution

Last week, I was honored to be the dinner keynote speaker at the European Petrochemical Associations 2nd Interactive Supply/Demand Chain Workshop in Brussels, Belgium.  What a beautiful place, where cobblestones meet bullet trains- two completely differing eras of transportation systems still working (collaborating?) after all these years.  This years’ workshop theme was “21st Century Supply Chains for the Chemical Industry”.  2011 has also been declared by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) as the International Year of Chemistry (see the EPCA’s cool new video, “Chemistry- It’s All About You” here).

Throughout the highly interactive, roll up your sleeves workshop, the dialogue centered on innovative tools and value-added approaches to drive supply chain sustainability. Discussion focused on how the chemical industry and its supply chain can support an evolution from the old linear, materials economy mindset to a more circular, systems based sustainability minded economy, as Annie Leonard describes in the Story of Stuff.  As a matter of fact, that short film was the lead-in to my speech on supply chain sustainability and the nexus with consumerism, and the important role of chemical industry and its supply chain.

As I noted in last week’s post, consumer demand appears to be contributing (at least in part) to some of the gains in eco-friendly and sustainability focused design and manufacturing progress that’s being made in the global marketplace. In addition, shipping and logistics partners are showing leadership in embedding sustainability in the “source, make, deliver and return” product value chain as well.

The (Re) Emergence of “Co-opetiton”

The 21^st Century Supply Chain is a rapidly evolving business landscape.  Prior to around 2005,   the supply chain landscape centered on vertical collaboration between subsequent actors in the same supply chain, or between suppliers, manufacturers and customers.  Since the mid 2000’s, collaboration has refocused along the horizontal axis.   What appears to be happening is more evidence of collaborative exchanges between companies in the same market, or alliances, partnerships, clusters, and networked organizations.  This represents a real paradigm shift” that collaboration between producers, service providers and their customers.

Another older term coined in the mid 1990’s, “co-opetition” (or cooperative competition), may now find its place in the 21^st century supply chain lexicon.  Co-opetition occurs when companies work together for parts of their business where they do not believe they have competitive advantage and where they believe they can share common costs.   The basic premise of co-opetition strategy relies on leveraging alliances, partnering with other shippers (even competitors!) to control logistics  and transportation costs.   In  “games theory, this would be called a “plus-sum” scenario, in which the sum of what is gained by all players is greater than the combined sum of what the players entered the scenario with.  For instance, co-warehousing or load consolidation in transportation and warehousing are straightforward examples where collaborative competition has enormous financial and environmental benefits.  Co-opetition can in effect lead to expansion of the market and the formation of new business relationships, perhaps even the creation of new forms of enterprise.

Co-opetition partners typically include:

1. Producers, Customers, Consumers who drive producer demand and determine product eco-footprint
2. Shippers and Terminal Operators: who generate the freight flows and provide the critical infrastructure for product flow
3. Logistic Service Partners (3PLs): who can design and implement optimized solutions and move the freight
4. Fourth Party Providers: who can facilitate partnerships, referee blockages, find common ground; and
5. Governments who can assure that legal and regulatory arrangements are in place to support seamless collaboration

At the same time, though for co-opetition to be truly sustainable, there must also be  a cultural fit, strategic fit,  economic and operational fit,  and, trust and resources.

Source: Adapted from GEMI, Forging New Links

Co-opetition implies that cooperation and competition merge together to form a new kind of strategic interdependence between firms, giving rise to a co-opetitive system of reciprocal value creation. This new era of globalization has opened the door to co-opetition for small to midsized businesses that lack the scalable resources that larger companies have.  So this makes me think that if competition is a key driver behind innovation, and collaboration is a key 21^st Century supply chain success factor, then collaborative competition (co-opetiton) may be a new solution to drive supply chain sustainability. I posed this theory to a warm response by the 65-plus chemical industry logistics professionals in Brussels. Yes, it’s a bit of a heretical idea, but one that has shown in some industries to work.  Take Proctor & Gamble’s Connect + Develop or Nikes Considered Design and the Environment open innovation models.  Both offer opportunities to collaborate and drive innovative solutions that can benefit consumers, and open business channels to entrepreneurs lacking resources to bring new (possibly more sustainable) products or processes to market.

Summary: Forging New Links in the Chain

Co-opetition offers opportunities for manufacturers and their upstream suppliers and customers to strengthen each other’s performance, enhance differentiation and foster end-consumer brand loyalty in the following ways:

1. By tapping into to customer and consumer preferences, industry can adapt its processes, products and services to enhance competitiveness
2. By collaborating, customer-supplier teams can address Triple Bottom Line (3BL)-related technical challenges that affect the profitability and performance of the overall supply chain.
3. Reciprocal value creation through vertical and horizontal “co-opetition” means recognizing and quantifying each other’s value contributions
4. By sharing intelligence and know-how about 3BL issues & emerging technologies.
5. By incorporating 3BL advantages into their products and services, e.g., reduced cost of ownership.

What ideas do you have to forge new links in the sustainable supply chain?  Let’s start the collaboration now, shall we?

The Sky’s NOT Falling: New Supply Chain, Logistics Surveys Cite Positive Benefits of Sustainability, Challenges Ahead

Geesh.  You’d think by the Twitter chatter that erupted from this weeks article in the Environmental Leader that the sky was falling.  The headline “Supply Chain Chiefs: Sustainability Isn’t Key” caught readers’ attention, but perhaps the messaging was taken a bit too negatively.

The article was focused on two recent surveys by eyefortransport (EFT), a very knowledgeable and (in my view) a marquee market research entity focused on the transportation industry.  In the survey, chief supply chain officers were asked what key challenges they saw for 2011.  Well, a majority that responded did not view sustainability as a key challenge in 2010/2011.  According to the survey, “supply chain officers identified the “biggest business challenges driving their supply chain agenda” as variability and forecasting (42 percent), cost containment and reduction (39 percent), and supply chain visibility (35 percent). Sustainability strategies and practices only ranked 11^th in the list of concerns, with just over 15 percent.”

A second EFT survey of logistics service users’ ranked sustainability only 15^th in importance out of 24 challenges they face, behind such factors as the economy, cost control and fuel price fluctuations.  Meanwhile, the survey noted that respondents from third-party logistics services, “ranked sustainability sixth, with the economy, cost control and demand forecasting coming tops.”

The two surveys results yielded no real surprises. And where some may see this as a sort of “green Armageddon”, I only view this as a “teachable moment”.  One of the comments to the post rightly noted that “supply chain sustainability is a powerful means of supply chain streamlining, cost reduction and agility enhancement, and the topic can be used to improve communications and business relationships through the supply chain.”

Because the principal question posed was “what are the biggest challenges that supply chain managers’ face”, I’ll go out on a limb to say that “first mover” supply chain managers are already getting a handle around this issue and maybe the “concern” level is not as great as in the past. In fact, the survey results suggested that in the past couple of years, organizations are generally acting in a more proactive, sustainable manner. As the survey went on to indicate, well over 60 percent of those companies surveyed had implemented or were initiating sustainability focused efforts in 2010- ranking around 10^th out of nearly 40 supply chain management project categories- that’s actually a pretty good number!   In the logistics survey, most respondents noted a far higher level of positive environmental performance in 2010 compared with 2009.

You see- it’s all about how you look at a situation- greening of the supply chain through sustainability is not looking too shabby in my book, compared to just a few years ago.

If I had to call foul on the two surveys, perhaps EFT erred in recognizing sustainability as its own category.   Perhaps that was by design, but given the embedded nature of sustainability, I could easily link sustainability with a number of other categories that did rank high on supply chain officers “concern” lists, namely: cost containment and transportation and logistics constraints; also lower ranked issues such as product lifecycle, government mandate compliance.  In reality, sustainability is an overarching business approach that cuts across many business silos.  Supply chains by nature are systems-based networks that require dynamic management of internal and external inputs and outputs throughout a products value chain.  Supply chain sustainability is a powerful tool to identify and manage supply chain inefficiencies, reduce waste and optimize business performance.

As I suggested in an earlier article, the supply chain enablers are those who lead through innovation and don’t procrastinate.  These organizations have vision– for the short term and long-term.  These are the organizations I spend time evaluating and from which I share success stories.  It’s still valuable though to understand why some businesses hesitate in acting on sustainability or supply chain greening.  If you are a supply chain officer or logistics manager that is not paying attention to sustainability focused innovators yet, I suggest you take a closer look at what your peers or competitors are doing.  These leaders are changing the way business gets done- and more sustainably I might add.

Clearly by the EFT survey, much more work remains in 2011 but I am confident that supply chain greening and sustainability is here to stay.  Read why on my last post “Five Reasons that Sustainability and Supply Chain “Greening” Will Stick in 2011”.

Solving the Sustainable Sourcing & Green Supply Chain Management Puzzle: A 2010 Rewind

2010 is nearly ‘in the books’, and I vowed that I would not fall prey to the endless lists and recounting of annual accomplishments.  However, never in my 30 years in the sustainability and environmental business has there been so much attention paid to the influence of supply chain management and its role in the greening of business.  2010 has been truly remarkable in a number of key areas of green supply chain management from a number of perspectives, including: policy and governance, operations and optimization, guidance and standardization and metrics.  The green pieces of the supply chain and sustainability puzzle appear to be nicely falling into place.  Key themes that I can glean from this most incredible year are:

Big Industry Movers and Government Green up the Supply Chain- over the past year, observers and practitioners read nearly weekly announcements of yet another major manufacturer or retailer setting the bar for greener supply chain management.  With a much greater focus on monitoring, measurement and verification, Wal-Mart, IBM, Proctor and Gamble, Kaiser Permanente, Puma, Ford, Intel, Pepsi, Kimberly-Clark, Unilever, Johnson & Johnson, Herman Miller among many others made a big splash by announcing serious efforts to engage, collaborate and track supplier/vendor sustainability efforts.  Central to each of these organizations is how vendors impact the large companies carbon footprint, in addition to other major value chain concerns such as material and water resource use, and waste management.  Even government agencies here in the U.S. (General Services Administration) and abroad (DEFRA in Britain) have set green standards and guidelines for federal procurement.  More and more companies are jumping on the green train and the recognition is flowing wide and deep.

Supply Chain Meets Corporate Social Responsibility- Adding to many companies existing concerns over environmental protection, large products manufacturers such as Nestle, Corporate Express, Danisco, Starbucks, Unilever and the apparel industry stepped up in a big way to address human rights, fair labor and sustainable development in areas in which they operate throughout the world. Each of these companies and others like WalMart have embraced the “whole systems” approach that I’ve previously written about in this space and that underscore transparency and collaboration the “value” in the supply chain.  Each company recognizes that to be a truly sustainable organization, it must reach deep beyond its four walls to its suppliers and customers.

Emerging Sustainability Standards Embrace Supply Chain Management- This year, the international Organization for Standardization (ISO) unveiled its ISO 26000 Corporate Social Responsibility guidance document.  In addition, two prominent organizations, UL Environment and Green Seal unveiled and vetted two sustainability focused product (GS-C1) and organization (ULE 880) standards, both of which may markedly affect supply chain behaviors in the future.  Central to all these standards and guidelines is how important supply networks are in supporting the entire product ‘value chain”, not only from an environmental perspective, but from a social and community focused perspective.

Transparency and Collaboration Take on a Green Hue– in April, I had the honor of addressing C-suite supply chain managers and practitioners at the Aberdeen Supply Chain Summit in San Francisco.  A central theme of this conference involved the critical importance of collaboration throughout supply networks to enhance efficiencies and optimize value.   My talk (linked here) focused on how the most successful greening efforts in supply chains (like those used by Unilever, Herman Miller and Hewlett Packard) were based on value creation through the sharing of intelligence and know-how about environmental and emerging regulatory issues and emerging technologies.  Suppliers and customers can collaboratively strengthen each other’s performance and distributing cost of ownership.  Practitioners have found “reciprocal value” through enhanced product differentiation, reputation management and customer loyalty. And the continuing Wikileaks controversy is boldly reminding the business world that accountability and transparency and corporate social responsibility is vital and may even be a game changer in how products and services are made and delivered to the global marketplace.

Logistics Turning to Greener Solutions– numerous studies and surveys conducted by peer organizations this year underscored how sustainability among carriers and shippers was central in the minds of most logistics CEO’s.  Whether it was by land, air or sea, shipping and logistics embraced sustainability as a key element of business planning and strategy in 2010.  I also had the pleasure of visiting briefly with FedEx’s Vice President, Environmental Affairs & Sustainability (@Mitch_Jackson) this fall and learned of the myriad of operational innovations and sustainability focused metrics that the company is tracking throughout its operations and maintenance activities. And UPS even mentioned its efforts to manage its carbon footprint in its catchy new brand campaign “I Love Logistics”.  Finally logistics companies are partnering with manufacturing to support reverse logistics efforts designed to manage end of life or post consumer uses of products or resources.

Lean Manufacturing Meets Green Supply Chain– as manufacturing continues its slow rebound from the Great Recession, companies are recommitting themselves to implementing less wasteful production as a way to leverage cost and enhance savings.  Parallel efforts are in play also to incorporate more environmentally sustainable work practices and processes.  Enhancing this effort to lean the product value chain is recognition of upstream suppliers and vendors work practices and possible impacts they may have on manufacturing outputs. Lean efforts have been demonstrated to yield substantial environmental benefits (pollution prevention, waste reduction and reuse opportunities) as well as leverage compliance issues.  More and more, companies are exploring the overlaps and synergies between quality-based lean  and environmentally based ‘green’ initiatives.

Supply Chain and Climate Action– Rounding out the year, the climate summit in Cancun (COP16) produced modest results (given the low expectations all around, what was accomplished looked huge by comparison to Copenhagen).  Activities at COP16, especially by the private sector were geared toward identifying key linkages between supply chain sustainability and climate change.   Perhaps the biggest news to emerge from the two-week conference was an effort by apparel manufacturers to enhance supply chain social responsibility and an internet database that will list the energy efficiency of most ocean-going vessels, in a scheme designed to reduce shipping emissions by nearly 25%.  As I noted, this effort is important not only because it recognizes shipping and transport as a backbone” of commerce (as other industry sponsored programs have recognized already), but because of the value of transparency in enhancing supply chain efficiencies.

Looking Forward to 2011

Yes indeed, it’s been a big year for supply chain management and its intersection with sustainability.  I see little for 2011 that will slow down this upward green trajectory, and naturally I am glad.  I am glad that more businesses “get it” and don’t want to be viewed as laggards in leaning towards a business ethic that values sustainability and socially influenced governance. I am glad that more companies are seeking out green innovation through new technologies and being ‘first movers’ in their respective business spaces.

And I am glad that you (my readers) and I am here to be part of the change.

Sir Bransons Climate Challenge to Sea Cargo Shippers- Carbon Accounting Successes & New Tools

In prior posts I have discussed the importance of transportation and logistics as critical elements in anchoring a sustainable supply chain (see separate posts here and here).  Last week I discussed the key linkages between supply chain sustainability and climate change.   No comes a bit of encouraging news from the Cancun Climate Summit (COP16), still in progress through this week.  A free internet database was announced over the weekend, the focus of which will list the energy efficiency of almost every ocean-going vessel, in a scheme designed to reduce shipping emissions by nearly 25%.  This effort is important not only because it recognizes shipping and transport as a backbone” of commerce, but because of the value of transparency in enhancing supply chain efficiencies.

“By eco-labelling clean and dirty ships, we hope to change the mindset in shipping and begin making gigaton-scale reductions in emissions,” said Peter Boyd, director of Carbon War Room.  The Carbon War Room was a co-founded by Sir Richard Branson.  Using publicly available data on the engine size and CO2 emissions of nearly 60,000 ships, exporters and importers, as well as holidaymakers on cruises, will be able to choose between ships that run on cleaner fuels and have other technologies designed to reduce environmental “loads”.

The initiative, called Shippingefficiency.org, rates ships on a scale from A to G in a similar fashion to ratings given to fridges or washing machines. According to the site, the Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) ratings for an individual ship are calculated by assessing the values for that ship to overall average values for all ships of that type (e.g. bulk carriers) and to other ships of a similar size within this type. It will “allow supermarkets, oil and mining companies, food importers, retailers and manufacturers” to specify that their goods are sent from point to point by the least polluting ships.

The “Dirt” on Sea Shipping…

The shipping industry has been challenged for decades to find ways to efficiently deliver the majority of goods from point of manufacture to point of use.   Ocean transport carries more than 90 percent of the world’s traded goods and contributes between 3 percent and 4 percent of global emissions.  Shipping has been slow to address carbon emissions, choosing to focus on containment and control of other critical pollutants such as sulfur dioxide (SOx) and nitrogen oxides (NOx)[1]. According to the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the UN body that governs shipping, the industry has an opportunity to make substantial money by reducing the first 250 million tons of its CO2e.[2]

Shipping has a number of inherent institutional issues that hamper demand for widely available fuel-efficient technologies.  For instance, the worlds shipping fleet has been driven for years by engines designed to burn the cheapest, dirtiest “bunker” fuel, passing on the cost. Nearly 15% of the world’s ships account for about half of all the industry emissions.  In addition, most shipping lines traditionally pass on most of the fuel costs to charterers, providing few incentives to build more efficient ships (often referred to as the “landlord and tenant scenario”).  In addition, shipyards worldwide always charge an often cost prohibitive premium to operators for new designs and technologies

Also, its shipping-attributed pollution can pose serious human and environmental health risks.  For instance, particulate matter emissions from ships have been reported to contribute to an estimated 60,000 premature deaths annually (with most deaths occurring near coastlines in Europe, East Asia, and South Asia), as reported in a 2007 study published in Environmental Science & Technology.

…and What the Industry is Doing About It

Mr. Branson’s announcement in Cancun adds another initiative to the increased attention being paid to the transport industry in managing pollutants, including greenhouse gas emissions. As I recently noted in a recent post on shipping and logistics, Inbound Logistics Magazine earlier this year released its Top 50 Green Partners listing earlier this year.  Eight of the companies and organizations listed were ocean carriers.  These appear to be true leaders in implementing improved operational practices designed to lower the environmental impact of their operations.

Also, back in the early 2000’s, the Business for Social Responsibility (BSR) launched the Clean Cargo Working Group (CCWG). The group consists of over 60% of the leading multinational manufacturers (shippers) and freight carriers and forwarders (carriers).  The group is dedicated to” integrating environmentally and socially responsible business principles into transportation management”.  Unlike the new EEDI rating, the CCWG methodology is the only existing standardized approach to calculate CO2 emissions for ocean going container vessels. The data is put in the form of emissions factors to enable shippers and liners calculate carbon emissions in a consistent manner.  This allows trade routes to be compared. In addition, the CCWG annually benchmarks member lines’ environmental performance, further increasing focus and reducing environmental footprint.

Other collaborative efforts that cover other transport modes include EPA’s SmartWay Transportation Partnership, Ecological Transport Information Tool, and the GreenShip Project.  Each of these and other transportation-focused groups have made strides in developing tools and methods for different parts of the sector.

Case Studies

Reducing emissions is technically feasible using current technology, and, in the case of efficiency measures to reduce fuel consumption, can contribute cost savings that make it economically attractive with appropriate financing of upfront costs. Of those emission reductions, the first approximate 25% of reductions could be achieved “profitability”, according to the IMO GHG Study.

Big Players Getting it Done: At a transportation conference convened this past summer by the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lee Kindberg of Maersk Lines (one of the top 50 Green Partners reported by Inbound Logistics) reported that “… vessels are becoming more energy efficient and reducing emission. This is due to technologies, operations, the speeds we operate at, and the vessel sizes as there definitely are economies of scale. …Since 2002 [Maersk] reduced our CO2 emissions per container per kilometer by 20% and set a goal of an additional reduction of 25% by 2020.  In addition Kindberg indicated that the company was switching to a distillate fuel instead of the heavy fuel oil, resulting in sulfur oxide emission reductions of 95%, particulate matter emission reductions by 86% and the NOx emissions reductions by 6% to 12% depending on the vessels.  Reducing ship speeds, reducing ship drag, or ballast water optimization and treatment systems has also increased ship efficiencies along with improvements in ship procedures, crew training and performance measurement using independent third party environmental certifications like ISO 14001.

The Little (Hybrid) Tug That Can: Major cargo seaports are also collaborating with companies to introduce new technology to comply with stricter air quality regulations.  The world’s first hybrid electric tugboat, Foss Maritime’s Carolyn Dorothy which works in Southern California’s San Pedro Bay at the Port of Long Beach, California, emits 73 percent less soot (tugs are known high soot contributors), 51 percent fewer nitrogen oxides and 27 percent less carbon dioxide than a standard tug of comparable size.  The tug also can claim improved fuel efficiency and a quieter operation, all contributing to a lower environmental footprint.

Conclusions/Food for Thought

This past weekend’s announcement at Cancun and the slew of industry cross-sector, multi-modal collaborations are encouraging.  Whether it’s sea shipping, air cargo, rail or road transport, all modes play a vital key to solving part of the climate change puzzle.  As Maersks Kindberg stated this year at the FHWA conference, “We have to keep in mind that it’s the total lifecycle footprint that matters. Transportation is often only a small part of the total …If you focus on improvements and actually incorporate the carbon impact into business decisions, you can actually make real progress on both and perhaps also improve your business.’

It’s clear that all the nodes of a supply chain (from design to manufacturing and from point of use to end of life) and all the modal components in between want to be part of the solution, not part of the problem.  Businesses are stepping up to the challenge.

As we head into the final week of climate negotiations at Cancun, are the world’s climate negotiators up to the task?

---

[1]According to the Carbon War Room, the shipping industry is the largest emitter of NOx and is also one of the largest emitter of SOx.  It’s been estimated by the IMO that demand will increase, and CO2e emissions from ships will reach 18% of all manmade Greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 under “business as usual”.

[2] The IMO GHG Study 2009 estimates that eco-efficiency technologies could reduce CO2e emissions from shipping by between 25% and 75% with substantial monetary advantages.

Greener Shipping and Logistics- The Backbone of the Sustainable Supply Chain

The backbone of any sustainable supply chain relies on an effective and reliable transport network. And transport networks are clearly the lifeline that drives economic engines. Therefore it’s pretty easy to deduce that the transportation sector needs to be a well oiled, highly efficient and highly productive system. An interesting 2007 University of Massachusetts research study that I recently read studied the importance and criticality of transport systems in supply chains- and just as importantly how “sustainability” plays a vital role in planning and execution. From the study, the authors concluded:

“Without transportation, inputs to production processes do not arrive, nor can finished goods reach their destinations. In today’s globalized economy, inputs to production processes may lie continents away from assembly points and consumption locations, further emphasizing the critical infrastructure of transportation in product supply chains.”

“Indeed, companies are increasingly being held accountable not only for their own performance in terms of environmental accountability, but also for that of their suppliers, subcontractors, joint venture partners, distribution outlets and, ultimately, even for the disposal of their products. Consequently, poor environmental performance at any stage of the supply chain may damage the most important asset that a company has, which is its reputation.

This study underscores the messaging from a great monthly meeting that I attended this week of the Portland Chapter of the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (www.cscmp.org). The main topic concerned methods for measuring carbon emissions in the transportation sector. Excluding a full scale life-cycle analysis of the manufacturing of a product, transportation of goods and services represents a key carbon emissions point (second only to the utilities sector).

The presenters were from a unique company, GreenShipping (www.greenshipping.com), located in Hood River, OR, at the opposite end of the beautiful Columbia River Gorge from where I live In Vancouver, WA. The Columbia River has itself served as a vital “lifeline” of commerce since the early 1800s, when the Hudson’s Bay Company established quarters just down the road at Fort Vancouver. But I digress.

The folks from GreenShipping shared with the audience the key drivers (no pun intended) that are motivating freight transportation companies and logistics providers in a direction to measure and manage their “environmental footprint.” In some cases, companies that don’t measure their carbon emissions are finding themselves shut out of contract opportunities. Research has shown that trucking, rail, marine and air modes of transport all have their up and down sides and it’s best to look at point to point options that will result in lower energy/fuel costs, use of modes that use cleaner fuels (LNG, ultra low sulfur diesel), and generate fewer greenhouse gas emissions (use of larger ships that employ more efficient equipment or operational practices). To that end, the transportation and logistics sector has been proactively looking at ways to improve efficiency, while simultaneously reducing environmental footprints associated with moving goods.

This post cannot get into the full range of transport avoidance, operational and technological changes that can be implemented to reduce the environmental footprint associated with moving goods (later posts for sure!). However, as an example, Freightliner Trucks addressed the issue of fuel savings by focusing on more efficient aerodynamics. The aerodynamic features to the company’s Cascadia truck result in 7.8 percent to 22 percent less drag than other aerodynamic tractors, resulting in annual fuel savings of $900 to $2,750 per truck. Translate that into carbon emission reductions and the numbers would be enormous.

Meantime, there are also a number of tools that are available to assess GHG emissions and other environmental attributes associated with supply and transport, to allow you to accurately capture data and measure the true value of your supply chain. And that is where companies like GreenShipping.com can offer ways to measure and quantify what are called Scope 3 (indirect) carbon emissions. The company can help to ship, track, measure carbon emissions and (and here is a unique feature) offset the carbon generated by shipments through a partnership with the Bonneville Environmental Foundation (http://www.b-e-f.org). It’s also important to throw in that In 2004, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) launched SmartWay^SM— an innovative brand that represents environmentally cleaner, more fuel efficient transportation options http://bit.ly/amztNk.

The transportation sector makes great leaps in addressing its environmental footprint, so if you’ve not already started exploring your own environmental footprint, it’s a great time to start leading the way—or risk being a laggard.

A key takeaway from yesterday (attended by many logistics providers and goods manufacturers) was that taking a proactive look at supply chain logistics through a “green” lens is good for a company’s bottom line in terms of efficiencies and cost savings. But the residual reputational and environmental upsides are enormous in a challenging and competitive economy.

Your thoughts and ideas? What is your company doing to tackle this challenge?
This post was originally published on my New Green Supply Chain Blog, which can be found at https://community.kinaxis.com/people/DRMeyer/blog

What Motivates Suppliers to Meet Sustainable Sourcing Requirements- The Carrot vs. The Stick?

Are you old enough to remember the opening lines of the Buffalo Springfield song  For What it’s Worth? “There’s something happening here/What it is ain’t exactly clear/There’s a man with a gun over there/Telling me I got to beware”. I am thinking there is a green supply chain revolution in play, just as there was political unrest and turbulence of the mid to late 1960’s from which this song originated. Methinks Walmart may be “the Man”, but are they really holding a gun to suppliers?  I’m not so sure.

Walmarts efforts internally to establish its sustainability index continue to slowly progress along (I still predict a 2-3 year process before anything tangible emerges).  But, the company is as I predicted last year, changing the rules in how sustainability is felt up and down the supply chain- mostly for good.  Many companies in the retail and electronics sectors, such as Proctor and Gamble and IBM have most notably stepped up to the plate, but many others are learning from Wal-Mart’s green supply as well (see “The surprising success of the green supply chain” http://bit.ly/digXmH).  So how is this “cat herding” happening at such a rapid pace and what are the key issues being driven through the ‘value chain’.  Is this just a matter of keeping up with the next guy?

First- the ‘drivers”.  There are a number of factors and issues, both internal and external that can be attributed to this hot phenomenon in the supply chain space. In a 2009 study by GTM Research, sustainability was clearly a driving topic in supply chain management, ranking behind only three factors:  improving customer service, reducing supply chain risk and managing and optimizing an extended supply chain network  (Greening The Supply Chain: Benchmarking Sustainability Practices And Trends- GTM Research 2009 http://bit.ly/cl1QlU ).   The same study found that several factors were driving the greening of the supply chain across a number of vertical markets, notably:

• Lost sales (projected to be in the billions of dollars) because products in the supply chain were not “green” enoug
• Increased energy and transportation costs (accounting to over 50% of the cost increases)
• Damage to reputation and
• Supply disruptions

In response, Walmart and other major retail and industry giants are driving upstream and downstream performance based changes, designed to reduce suppliers environmental footprints and focused on several key areas:  energy management, fuel cost containment, carbon emissions, water use and waste generation.  New issues also factoring into the mix include green chemistry and management of restricted materials, depending on the geographic reach of global markets served.

To that end suppliers, from Tier One on down through the chain are responding to varying degrees and the early results appear favorable. As I reported last week, companies like Herman Miller, Walmart, P&G and Johnson and Johnson (http://bit.ly/cFBzjD) are showing marked reductions in most of the key metrics that they have been focused on, with much of the credit due to those suppliers who have found business sense in sustainability.

Now to that you may say that suppliers are goaded, cajoled, forced, strongly encouraged, or perhaps threatened to comply, or else risk losing millions in contracts.  Actually, what I am seeing with the likes of Miller, IBM, Hewlett Packard and others continues to be more of the carrot and less of the stick- more collaboration and performance based incentives coupled with onsite verification- that’s all good because it encourages accountability.  But that’s a topic for a future post.

In the meantime, to paraphrase another line in that Buffalo Springfield tune:  “Stop [vendors] what’s that sound /everybody look what’s going round”.  Until next time.

This post was originally published on my New Green Supply Chain Blog, which can be found at https://community.kinaxis.com/people/DRMeyer/blog

New Green Supply Chain Blog on Kinaxis Supply Chain Community

Friends- I want to let you all know that I have recently been invited to be the lead expert blogger on green supply chain issues for the Kinaxis Supply Chain Community. 3500 members and growing strong! As mentioned, The Supply Chain Expert Community is “Your social place for learning, laughter, sharing and connecting.”

LEARN—Read insights from our bloggers and members. Ask questions, discuss trends, research topics.

LAUGH—Visit the “Just for Laughs” section, and enjoy some supply chain humor.

SHARE—Impart the lessons you’ve learned and the obstacles you still face. Invite your friends and colleagues to join the discussion.

CONNECT—Meet peers who face similar challenges and opportunities. Give and receive support.

You can view my Green Supply Chain Blog here:

https://community.kinaxis.com/people/DRMeyer/blog

Green Transportation- All It Takes is Innovation and Drive

Framing the Issue

“Only 22 Fortune 500 companies have begun blunting their supply chain’s impact on the environment” The amount of cargo shipped is “expected to triple in the next 20 years” Measuring ghg emissions is the “fundamental starting point” of “any serious entity” When reducing transportation emissions, “it is best to begin with the ‘low-hanging fruit’” Rail transport is four times more efficient per ton than motor and 600 times more efficient than air transport ‘Greening” Transportation in the Supply Chain

“Logistics” is the integrated management of all the activities required to move products through the supply chain. Generally, “green logistics” focuses on seeking ways to manage the environmental footprint of the supply chain associated with your product, from point of manufacture through to the end user.  This translates often to taking a life cycle approach to manufacturing and distributing your product (as well as reverse logistics in some cases).

Transportation is a very key element of the logistics process and the supply chain which runs from vendors through to you to your customers. It involves the movement of product, service/speed and cost which are three of the five key issues of effective logistics. It also impacts with the other two logistics– movement of information and integration within and among suppliers, customers and carriers.

The 2009 14th Annual 3PL Study found that newer concepts and technologies are emerging to help both 3PLs and shippers cope with a “new, slower growth world”. The report advocated creating “horizontal, cross-company supply chains refereed by neutral third parties. This innovation is based on the concept that by clustering specific logistics activities and consolidating supply chains, significant economies of scale can be achieved in terms of efficiency (logistics cost), effectiveness (customer service) and environmental sustainability (carbon footprint)”, and as noted below.

Solutions:

From a logistics standpoint, 3PL providers might consider development of strategies to eliminate unnecessary materials handling or avoidable transport, and look for efficiencies that could move more product at a time.  Trucking, rail, marine and air modes of transport all have their up and down sides and it’s best to look at point to point options that will result in lower energy/fuel costs, use of modes that use cleaner fuels (LNG, ultra low sulfur diesel), and generate fewer greenhouse gas emissions (use of larger ships that employ more efficient equipment or operational practices).

Any number of “green” strategies to enhance the competitive position of freight-forwarding services are being implemented worldwide , including at key ports of entry here in the U.S.  Most freight related environmental issues generally involve solutions to reduce energy consumption and limit greenhouse gas emissions.  Naturally some carbon or energy intensive issues can be managed only if they are directly controlled by freight forwarding companies, while other activities not under direct control can only be influenced in practice (for instance contract carriers).

Business Case Examples

• Freightliner Trucks. Freightliner Trucks addressed the issue of fuel savings by focusing on more efficient aerodynamics. The aerodynamic features to the company’s Cascadia truck result in 7.8 percent to 22 percent less drag than other aerodynamic tractors, resulting in annual fuel savings of $900 to $2,750 per truck.

• Nortel: Nortel shifted from air to sea transportation to deliver significant cost reduction and took major adjustments in production planning and order scheduling to make it work For Nortel, the increased use of sea freight has saved more than $1,000,000 versus the more expensive air freight cost, as well as the opportunity to negotiate improved pricing that has realized approximately $500,000 of cost reduction.

• The 2009 14th Annual 3PL Study: This study found that shippers want to create more sustainable, environmentally conscious supply chains. That means striking a balance between labor and transportation costs and the market value of carbon-reducing processes, compressed production cycles and less carbon intensive transportation modes that beat the competition.

Summary

Eyefortransport’s Green Transportation & Logistics European Report  (2008-09)  indicated the “The results from this year’s survey show that the supply chain industry has increased its focus on green initiatives from last year, and anticipates this trend to continue for some time yet. This has been shown in most of the topics of the survey, from increased adoption of initiatives, greater awareness of options available, growing incentives for greening whilst barriers are diminishing, to greater anticipated ROI and effectiveness of supply chains. …While those companies who have adopted strategies are gaining, those who have been left behind are finding it harder to implement changes. “

A 3PL green logistics strategy, regardless of whether you are involved with domestic or international, to be effective in gaining a competitive foothold, must recognize the criticality of:

• Customer requirements
• Mode selection
• Carrier relationships.
• Measuring/benchmarking
• Regulatory impact.
• Carrier mergers and alliances and closings
• Flexibility

Looking at these basic challenges through a sustainability lens offers greater opportunities to find innovative opportunities to optimize resources, leverage risk and maintain cost volatility through enhanced supply chain relationships

It goes to say that a sustainability-focused 3PL strategy one innovative way to respond to the dynamics of your business, its customers, suppliers and operation through cost-effective, value added supply chain solutions.