Page 251 - Materials Chemistry, Second Edition

A CASE STUDY OF THE PRACTICE OF SUSTAINABLE SUPPLY 239

7
The result was an 'open code scorecard that could be tied to a ratings sys-
tem. The intent was to lay the foundation for an industry-wide standard,
promote a working discussion, and determine common supply chain evalu-
ation processes across all industries. P&G's key suppliers and agencies were
also encouraged to use the scorecard with their suppliers, and other corporate
or government customers, to further improve total supply chain environmen-
tal sustainability.
The Supplier Sustainability Scorecard is designed to measure progress in
a simple consistent way (Table 10.1). The scorecard has a flexible scope in that
a company may report corporate-, plant-, and customer-level information.
The P&G (customer)-specific information is preferred, so that the data sys-
tems could be used to develop life cycle inventories, or otherwise improve
the accuracy of product life cycle assessments and calculations of environ-
mental impact of particular supply chains. The scorecard includes common
core measures where the consumer products industry can make a meaning-
ful difference (e.g. energy usage). It leverages existing approaches and data,
so that companies that already have environmental management systems in
place save time and expense, and the metrics are viewed externally as cred-
ible. For example, the metrics for greenhouse gas emissions are aligned with
a worldwide standard, the Greenhouse Gas Protocol developed by the World
Resources Institute (WRI) and the World Business Council for Sustainable
Development (WBCSD). To encourage companies just starting to develop
systems to measure their sustainability, the scorecard metrics are expected to
remain simple and consistent for the first several years. In 2011, the metrics
include energy usage (electric and fuel), water usage (withdrawal and dis-
charge), waste disposal (hazardous and non-hazardous), Kyoto greenhouse
gas emissions (Scope 1 and 2), existence of environmental management sys-
tems, fines and sanctions (e.g. from permit violations), industry certifications,
renewable energy use, redirected waste (recycled/ reused/ recovered), and
transportation fuel efficiency.
The scorecard has several features to allow some flexibility and therefore
broader application across different kinds of companies. The units reported
may be absolute (e.g. metric tons of non-hazardous waste/year) or intensity
(e.g. metric tons of non-hazardous waste/year per unit of output) unit. The
scorecard has automated function checks and credits suppliers for improving
in either unit format. Annual Output is also requested to enable the Scorecard
Analysis Tool to convert absolute units to intensity units and vice-versa for
various comparison studies. The scorecard also has flexible input blocks for
tailoring to specific types of companies, such as those selling packaging, or
sustainably certified pulp. Finally, the scorecard includes a comments section
for companies to explain unique situations and inputs. The first two years of
experience showed that including qualifiers to the quantitative metrics helps
clarify true improvements or failings, and builds opportunity for dialogue and
collaboration in finding solutions to enable changes that improve company
sustainability.