Sharing Responsibility along Supply Chains A New Life-Cycle Approach and Software Tool for...
Transcript of Sharing Responsibility along Supply Chains A New Life-Cycle Approach and Software Tool for...
Sharing Responsibility along Supply
Chains
A New Life-Cycle Approach and Software Tool for
Triple-Bottom-Line Accounting
The Corporate Responsibility Research Conference 2006
4-5 September 2006, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland
Dr Thomas Wiedmann
Dr Manfred Lenzen
Integrated Sustainability Analysis
SD ReportingSD Reporting
&&
TBL AccountingTBL Accounting
SD ReportingSD Reporting
&&
TBL AccountingTBL Accounting
World Business Council for Sustainable Development (2002)
“There is a growing awareness that
shareholders’ value is enhanced by
increased corporate social and
environmental responsibility.”
“Corporate sustainability reports and
sustainability ratings are increasingly
used as key information for investment and
lending decisions.”
Challenges remain…
World Business Council for Sustainable Development (2002)
“There is little comparability among the various sustainability rating questionnaires sent to companies.”
“A key challenge remains reporting on the links between sustainability and the bottom line.”
Extend reporting boundaries
World Business Council for Sustainable Development (2002)
“Business will increasingly be expected to report across the value-chain, i.e. on supplier- and consumer-related impacts of activities, products and services.”
Trucost & Defra (May 2006)
Reporting on direct and indirect KPIs
“The Government expects businesses to report on their significant environmental impacts whether they are direct or indirect.”
“Businesses are likely to derive benefit from positively influencing their indirect environmental impacts.”
Trucost & Defra (May 2006)
Trucost & Defra (May 2006)
Indirect (environmental) impacts
Supply Chain Impacts (upstream)
Direct Company Impacts (on-site)
Downstream Impacts
Energy
Water
Raw materials
Logistics
Products in use
Product disposal
Boiler emissions
Car fleet emissions
Manufacturing emissions
Landfill waste
Recycling rate
“… there is still a lack of quantification in most reporting. … the majority of reports lack depth, rigour or quantification.”
“Most business will have supply chain impacts that they should understand and consider reporting. There is no single, quantifiable measure that companies can use as a Key Performance Indicator for the effect of their upstream supply chain on the environment.”
Trucost & Defra (May 2006)
The problem of quantification
Principle 1: quantitative
Principle 2: relevant & reliable
Principle 3: comparable
Principle 4: complete
SD Reporting Principles
TBL Accounting
without boundaries
TBL Accounting
without boundaries
Where to draw the boundary?
e.g. total emissions (direct
plus indirect)
e.g. direct (on-site) emissions
e.g. purchases of a company
How to allocate
indirect impacts
along a supply chain?
How to allocate
indirect impacts
along a supply chain?
Full (100%) Producer Responsibility
>> only on-site impacts!
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
SAND MINING
GLASS MAKING
GLASS CONTAINER MAKING
FOOD PROCESSING
FINAL CONSUMER
CO
2 em
issi
on
s [
t]
Full (100%) Consumer Responsibility
>> all upstream impacts with the consumer
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
SAND MINING
GLASS MAKING
GLASS CONTAINER MAKING
FOOD PROCESSING
FINAL CONSUMER
CO
2 em
issi
on
s [
t]
value added / net output
Sharing responsibility …
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
SAND MINING
GLASS MAKING
GLASS CONTAINER MAKING
FOOD PROCESSING
FINAL CONSUMER
CO
2 em
issi
on
s [
t]
Sharing responsibility …
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
SAND MININGshare
GLASS MAKING
GLASS CONTAINER MAKING
FOOD PROCESSING
FINAL CONSUMER
CO
2 em
issi
on
s [
t]
Sharing responsibility …
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
SAND MININGshare
GLASS MAKING
GLASS CONTAINER MAKING
FOOD PROCESSING
FINAL CONSUMER
CO
2 em
issi
on
s [
t]
Sharing responsibility …
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
SAND MININGshare
GLASS MAKINGshare
GLASS CONTAINER MAKING
FOOD PROCESSING
FINAL CONSUMER
CO
2 em
issi
on
s [
t]
Sharing responsibility …
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
SAND MININGshare
GLASS MAKINGshare
GLASS CONTAINER MAKINGshare
FOOD PROCESSINGshare
FINAL CONSUMER
CO
2 em
issi
on
s [
t]
… shared responsibility
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
SAND MININGshared
GLASS MAKINGshared
GLASS CONTAINER MAKINGshared
FOOD PROCESSINGshared
FINAL CONSUMER
CO
2 em
issi
ons
[t]
BottomLine3
A new TBL software tool
BottomLine3
A new TBL software tool
Two data inputs
Financial accounts
On-site impacts
Outputs
> 100 TBL indicators
Quantification of total (direct and indirect) impacts
Sector benchmarking
Quantification of shared responsibility
Structural path analysis
Production layer analysis
IndicatorMy Bakery absolute impacts
My Bakery total intensities
Total Sector intensities
GDP 120,509 $ 8.69 ¢/$ 46.6 ¢/$
Gross operating surplus 244,853 $ 17.7 ¢/$ 17.2 ¢/$
Employment 13.5 emp-y 1.12 emp-min/$ 1.27 emp-min/$
Businesses 0.55 0.0000004 /$ 0.0000009 /$
Greenhouse gas emissions 343 t CO2-e 247 g CO2-e/$ 465 g CO2-e/$
Energy consumption 1,090 GJ 786 kJ/$ 2,640 kJ/$
Water use 30.5 ML 22.0 L/$ 20.1 L/$
Ecological Footprint 99.9 gha 0.72 g-m2/$ 1.18 g-m2/$
Land use 534 ha 3.85 m2/$ 6.99 m2/$
Particulate Matter <2,5mm 0.014 t 0.010 g/$ 0.016 g/$
Main TBL indicators
Benchmark Spider for Old Yorke Bakery
Compensation of employees
Gross operating surplus
Government revenue
Imports
ExportsEmployment
Material flow
Total energy consumption
Greenhouse gases
Benchmark spider diagram (TBL)
Benchmark Spider for Old Yorke Bakery
Total Ecological Footprint
Fossil fuel energy Footprint
Nuclear energy Footprint
Crop land Footprint
Pasture Footprint
Built land Footprint
Sea Footprint
Forest Fooprint
Benchmark spider diagram (Footprint)
Quantification of shared responsibility(GHG emissions in t CO2-eq.)
Responsibility retained by My Bakery
Responsibility passed on to other businesses
Responsibility passed on to final consumer
0.00
200.00
400.00
600.00
800.00
1,000.00
1,200.00
1,400.00
1,600.00
1,800.00
2,000.00
2,200.00
Energy consumption (GJ)
Structural Path Analysis
Structural path analysis (particulate matter)
Rank Path DescriptionPath Value
Path Order
Percentage in total impact
1 Refined sugar > My Bakery 0.008 t 2 58.5 %
2 Raw sugar > Refined sugar > My Bakery 0.0011 t 3 7.56 %
3 Animal food > Poultry > My Bakery 0.0010 t 3 6.79 %
4 Paper products > My Bakery 0.0006 t 2 4.14 %
5 Paper containers > My Bakery 0.0005 t 2 3.35 %
6 Electricity supply > My Bakery 0.0003 t 2 2.28 %
7 Electricity supply > Fresh meat > My Bakery 0.00016 t 3 1.14 %
8 Raw sugar > Animal food > Poultry > My Bakery 0.00014 t 4 1.02 %
9 Raw sugar > Plain flour > My Bakery 0.00012 t 3 0.84 %
10 Raw sugar > Raw sugar > Refined sugar > My Bakery 0.00010 t 4 0.69 %
11 Electricity supply > Plain flour > My Bakery 0.00007 t 3 0.52 %
12Animal food > Untreated milk > Dairy products > My Bakery
0.00007 t 4 0.49 %
13 Confectionery > Plain flour > My Bakery 0.00006 t 3 0.44 %
14 Animal food > Untreated milk > Cheese > My Bakery 0.00005 t 4 0.38 %
15 Fresh meat > My Bakery 0.00005 t 2 0.38 %
16 Animal food > Pigs > Fresh meat > My Bakery 0.00005 t 4 0.38 %
17 Animal food > Untreated milk > Butter > My Bakery 0.00004 t 4 0.32 %
THANK YOU
www.bottomline3.com
www.isa-research.co.uk