Promoting Sustainable Consumption and Production in Developing Countries for Poverty Alleviation

Triple Bottom Line quick scans for sustainable venturesSSFA/2009/NFL 5068 2A27 2643 2210 (NF 4020 06 51)

INVENTORY OF METHODOLOGIESPrepared for UNEP

Britta Freitag Floris van der Pol

December 2011

Table of contents

Introduction ..........................................................................................................................2

1 Background: People Planet Profit aspects in development..............................................3

2 The main framework........................................................................................................52.1 Triple Bottom Line.....................................................................................................52.2 Life Cycle Assessment...............................................................................................82.3 Life Cycle Management (LCM).................................................................................10

3 Specific methodologies in the Planet domain................................................................123.1 Ecological Footprints................................................................................................123.2 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA).................................................................133.3 Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA).............................................................143.4 Integrated Environmental and Economic Accounting (SEEA)..................................15

4 Supporting strategies and methods...............................................................................164.1 Corporate Social Responsibility...............................................................................164.2 Stakeholder engagement........................................................................................174.3 The five milestone approach...................................................................................184.4 Eco-labelling and social labelling.............................................................................204.5 ILO’s Decent Work Agenda......................................................................................214.6 Standardization in Production and Consumption.....................................................224.7 Valuation methods for environmental and social assets.........................................23

5 Some concluding remarks..............................................................................................26

References ........................................................................................................................27

Annex 1 Domains for assessing social and environmental performance as indicated by various sources...............................................................................................35

Annex 2 Overview of valuation techniques for environmental and social impacts.......36Annex 3 Resources with tools and data analysis for addressing climate change in

Strategic Environmental Assessments............................................................38

1

IntroductionSustainable ventures can make a significant contribution to poverty alleviation and environmental sustainability. These business initiatives and activities improve human well-being and the environment on a profitable basis for people, planet and profit, contributing to economic growth and improvements in human wellbeing. Yet, ventures and decision makers need to reach a better understanding of how environmental, social and economic considerations fit together. Without that understanding, business opportunities are missed and we risk turning today’s development successes into tomorrow’s environmental and social challenges.

The United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) has developed a toolbox1 that helps to guide key questions related to sustainable ventures such as the identification of opportunities, the understanding of the determinants of success and the assessment of costs and benefits.

The toolbox addresses initiatives that support sustainable ventures, including donor programmes, award schemes, private and public investors, professional education programmes and policy makers. It provides general frameworks, which need to be adapted for specific purposes, for example to develop a questionnaire for loans, forms to participate in competitions or checklists for initial business screenings.

The Royal Tropical Institute (KIT) in Amsterdam works on value chain development and sustainable ventures in various programmes and develops instruments for the ANNONA sustainable investment fund2 to analyse businesses on their triple bottom line impacts.

Building on the toolbox allows KIT to integrate planet aspects in its work on sustainable markets and value chains, to analyse better how attention to the ‘planet’ may contribute to positive impacts for ‘people’ and ‘profit’.

In 2009 UNEP and KIT agreed to co-operate with respect to the project entitled ‘Promoting Sustainable Consumption and Production in Developing Countries for Poverty Alleviation’ to systematically analyse sustainable business ventures in developing countries from a lifecycle perspective, helping to make the business case for investing in the environment.

The activities to undertake included 1) the preparation of an inventory of methodologies for assessment of Triple Bottom Line impacts; 2) further development and refinement of tools for analysing sustainable ventures, including coordination with other relevant actors; 3) presentation of three case studies of sustainable business ventures in developing countries.

The present report reflects the results of the inventory of methodologies ad approaches.As past KIT work on sustainable markets and value chains has been oriented to the People and Planet aspects with publications on improving the position of small farmers in value chains, on up-grading, and sustainable procurement, this document will focus more on the Planet aspects. It aims orienting the further development of methodologies for taking into account environmental cost and benefit in People-Planet-Profit assessments of enterprises. The baseline for this paper is UNEP’s publication “Towards Triple Impact – Toolbox for analysing sustainable ventures in developing countries” (2009).

We acknowledge the interesting exchanges and discussions with MER Netherlands and with the private consultancy firms AidEnvironment and CREM.

1 UNEP (2009) Towards Triple Impact. Toolbox for Analysing Sustainable Venturesin Developing Countries.2 www.annona.nl

2

Figure 1 Dimensions of Sustainability Source UNEP 2007, Life Cycle Management

1 Background: People Planet Profit aspects in developmentSustainable development should improve the quality of life for every individual without expending the earth’s resources beyond its capacity. The path towards sustainable development requires that businesses, governments and individuals take action – changing consumption and production behaviours, setting policies and changing practices. Businesses have to find alternative and innovative ways to be profitable in the long run. This includes improving the environmental performance of production processes and products as well as addressing and enhancing social accountability.

Especially in developing countries, poor people depend more directly on natural resources than any other group in society. OECD (2008a) indicates that natural capital constitutes around a quarter of total wealth in low-income countries. For the poorest in these countries - notably those living in rural areas - soil, water, fisheries, forests and minerals are the principal sources of income. They are usually the first to suffer when those resources are damaged or become scarce. This means it is vital to consider the environment in all development work. The concept of Sustainable Consumption and Production (SCP) was introduced helping policy-makers and various stakeholders in both developed and developing countries to recognize the need for “fundamental changes in the way societies produce and consume” (UNEP, 2007). Sustainable consumption and production is defined as: “the production and use of goods and services that respond to basic needs and bring a better quality of life, while minimizing the use of natural resources, toxic materials and emissions of waste and pollutants over the life cycle, so as not to jeopardize the ability to meet the needs of the future generation.”

In this concept sustainability has three dimensions (figure 1):- social- environmental, and- economic

referred to as People-Planet-Profit (PPP) dimensions.

Sustainable consumption is closely linked with sustainable production. For example, natural resources are affected both in the production and disposal phases of the product lifecycle as well as during the actual consumption of goods and services. The consumption and production processes are deeply intertwined, and because the complexity of interaction is increasing in a globalized value chain, looking at one stage of the consumption and production process is not enough to assess sustainability. Therefore, it is necessary to consider the whole life cycle of a product. Usually, a life cycle begins with extracting raw materials that are than produced, packaged, transported, used, and eventually recycled, reused, or disposed (see figure 2).

3

The main goals of life cycle thinking are to reduce a product’s resource use and emissions to the environment as well as improve its socio-economic performance throughout its life cycle. This may facilitate links between the economic, social and environmental dimensions within an organization and throughout its entire value chain.

The term 'life cycle' refers to the notion that a fair analysis requires the assessment of raw material production, manufacture, distribution, use and disposal including all intervening transportation steps necessary or caused by the product's existence. The sum of all those steps - or phases - is the life cycle of the product.

For a business venture, the life cycle of a product is largely reflected in its value chain. Value creation ultimately happens when the product is used. Getting to this stage requiresa whole chain of activities from raw material extraction to production and distribution. The stage after the use of a product is often not considered part of the value chain, since traditionally the product was disposed without any value addition. Thus, the environmental and social costs from disposal mostly remained unaccounted for. This is changing, as more companies become aware that incorporating the end of-life stage into their value generation via recycling and reuse can yield savings. A venture can be situated at any stage of the life cycle or incorporate various stages into its value generating activities. All ventures also interact with other participants of the value chain, such as suppliers, distributors, vendors and customers. Since the life cycle perspective always considers all stages of the life of a product or service, whereas not all may be considered part of the value chain, maintaining a life cycle perspective is useful to ensure that all impacts of a sustainable venture are properly reflected in the analysis (UNEP, 2009a).

Assisting business ventures in becoming more sustainable goes beyond their own business interests. These ventures aim to align environmental, social and economic goals, and thus can make an important contribution to both local and global challenges: the alleviation of poverty, improvement of health, maintenance of local and global environmental goods such fertile land, clean air, a sound climate and rich biodiversity (UNEP, 2009b, Towards Triple Impact).

Available tools, methodologies or standard business planning models do not always reflect these particular challenges and targeted tools are rare. Presently various approaches are used with different auxiliary strategies and methods. In the following chapters a succinct overview is given, first of UNEP’s main framework, then of other approaches used in the planet domain and finally of auxiliary strategies and methods.

4

Figure 2: A product system, or life cycle can begin with extracting raw materials from natural resources. Materials and energy are then part of production, packaging, distribution, use, maintenance, and eventually recycling, reuse, recovery or final disposal (UNEP, 2007, Life Cycle Management; Jensen and Remmen, 2005).

2 The main frameworkUNEP’s document Towards Triple Impact (2009b) and preparatory work (UNEP, 2006ab) bring together Triple Bottom Line and Life Cycle approaches. Methodologies associated with these approaches are described in the next sections.

2.1 Triple Bottom Line

The triple bottom line (or "TBL", "3BL", or "people, planet, profit") captures the earlier mentioned values and criteria for measuring organizational (and societal) success: economic, ecological and social. In practical terms, triple bottom line accounting means expanding the traditional reporting framework to take into account social (people) and ecological (planet) performance in addition to financial performance.

"People" (human capital) pertains to fair and beneficial business practices toward labour and the community and region in which a corporation conducts its business. A TBL company conceives a reciprocal social structure in which the well being of corporate, labour and other stakeholder interests are interdependent.

A TBL enterprise seeks to benefit many constituencies, not exploit or endanger any group of them. The "up-streaming" of a portion of profit from the marketing of finished goods back to the original producer of raw materials, i.e., a farmer in fair trade agricultural practice, is a not unusual feature. A TBL business would not use child labour and monitor all contracted companies for child labour exploitation, would pay fair salaries to its workers, would maintain a safe work environment and tolerable working hours, and would not otherwise exploit a community or its labour force.

A TBL business also typically seeks to "give back" by contributing to the strength and growth of its community with such things as health care and education. Quantifying this bottom line is relatively new, problematic and often subjective.

"Planet" (natural capital) refers to environmental practices. A TBL company endeavours to benefit the natural order as much as possible or at the least do no harm and curtail environmental impact. A TBL endeavour reduces its ecological footprint by, among other things, carefully managing its consumption of energy and non-renewable and reducing manufacturing waste as well as rendering waste less toxic before disposing of it in a safe and legal manner. TBL manufacturing businesses typically conduct a life cycle assessment of products to determine what the true environmental cost is from the growth and harvesting of raw materials to manufacture to distribution to eventual disposal by the end user. A triple bottom line company does not produce harmful or destructive products such as weapons, toxic chemicals or batteries containing dangerous heavy metals for example.

Currently, the cost of disposing of non-degradable or toxic products is borne financially by governments and environmentally by the residents near the disposal site and elsewhere. In TBL thinking, an enterprise which produces and markets a product which will create a waste problem should not be given a free ride by society. It would be more equitable for the business which manufactures and sells a problematic product to bear part of the cost of its ultimate disposal.

Ecologically destructive practices, such as overfishing or other endangering depletions of resources are avoided by TBL companies. Often environmental sustainability is the more profitable course for a business in the long run. Arguments that it costs more to be environmentally sound are often specious when the course of the business is analyzed over a period of time. Generally, sustainability reporting metrics are better quantified and standardized for environmental issues than for social ones.

"Profit" is the bottom line shared by all commerce, conscientious or not. In the original concept, within a sustainability framework, the "profit" aspect needs to be seen as the economic benefit enjoyed by the host society. It is the lasting economic impact the organization has on its economic environment. This is often confused to be limited to the internal profit made by a company or organization. Therefore, a TBL approach cannot be interpreted as traditional corporate accounting plus social and environmental impact.

Pro and contra arguments for TBL management in enterprises

5

Arguments supporting the concept of TBL companies are business oriented, social and environmental :

- Reaching untapped market potential: TBL companies can find financially profitable niches which were missed when money alone was the driving factor. Examples include: adding ecotourism or geo-tourism to an already rich tourism market such as the Dominican Republic

- In developing profitable methods to assist NGOs with their missions such as fundraising, reaching clients, or creating networking opportunities with multiple NGOs, companies acquire specific knowledge and experience.

- Adapting to new business sectors: For example, Fair Trade and Ethical Trade companies require ethical and sustainable practices from all of their suppliers and service providers. Thus a business planning to work in this sector must adopt a TBL business model (see e.g. ICC, 2008).

- With the emergence of an externally consistent green economics and agreement on definitions of potentially contentious terms such as full-cost accounting, natural capital and social capital, the prospect of formal metrics for ecological and social loss or risk has grown less remote through the 1990s.

- TBL companies could provide products or services which benefit underserved populations and/or the environment which are also financially profitable.

- The Earth's carrying capacity is at risk. In order to avoid catastrophic breakdown of climate or nature's services, there is a need for a comprehensive reform in global entrepreneurial and financial institutions.

Contra arguments are associated with :- Division of labour: Organisations would contribute most to the welfare of society in

all respects when they focus on what they do best. Thus the triple bottom line diverts business attention away from its core competency. Just as charitable organizations like the Red Cross would not be expected to attend to environmental issues or pay a cash dividend, and Greenpeace would not be expected to make a profit or succour the homeless, business should not be expected to take on concerns outside its core expertise, provided the business doesn't do obvious harm to people or the planet.

- Effectiveness: Poor societies would be less concerned for social and environmental matters. Support for the concept of TBL itself would come from the citizens of a society made wealthy by businesses attending to business. Implementing TBL would be ineffective because there is no single way in monetary terms to measure the benefits to the society and environment as there is with profit, making it difficult for businesses to recognize the benefits of using TBL for the company.

Related concepts

Concepts related to TBL are:

- Not Just for Profit (NJFP) : A slight variation of TBL is the concept of Not Just For Profit (see e.g. www.notjustforprofit.org). The approach captures an expanded spectrum of values for defining and measuring not only by their ability to generate Profit but also by their determination and success in driving a benefit for people and/or the planet. A Not Just For Profit company aims therefore being a sustainable one.

The concept of NJFP demands that a company's responsibility be to stakeholders rather than shareholders. In this case, 'stakeholders' refers to anyone who is influenced, either directly or indirectly, by the actions of the company. The business entity should be used as a vehicle for coordinating stakeholder interests in a sustainable manner, instead of maximizing shareholder (owner) profit. The concept is applicable to companies of all sizes and all levels of maturity, from a startup company to global enterprise.

- Environmental, social and governance (ESG) criteria : In some approaches the governance of an enterprise is regarded separately from the other social (“people”) aspects. A sustainable private sector then would require responsible business management of environmental, social and governance matters. ESG criteria are part of the Principles on Responsible Financing signed by the Association of the European Development Finance Institutions (EDFI, 2009).

6

- Stakeholder engagement and disclosure : Other approaches emphasize, besides corporate governance, also stakeholder engagement and disclosure (corporate transparency, accountability and an honest assessment of social and environmental risks) in the performance characteristics of a company. CERES (2010) proposes to measure these performances in the fields of operations, supply chain, transportation and logistics, products and services and employees (see Annex I). Specific guidelines for corporate governance disclosure have been prepared by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD /ISAR, 2006).

Implementation resources

Apart from the earlier mentioned UNEP (2009ab) guidelines, a number of institutes and registries developed guidelines enabling corporations and NGO’s to comparably assess, report on and improve the TBL impacts of a business. These include:

- CERES, a US based non-profit organization that leads a national coalition of investors, environmental organizations and other public interest groups working with companies to address sustainability challenges such as global climate change and water scarcity. They helped launching the Global Reporting Initiative and are the initiators of the CERES Roadmap for Sustainability (Ceres, 2010).

- The Global Reporting Initiative (GRI)3, a non-profit network organization that promotes economic sustainability and is now supported by the Swedish, Norwegian, German and Australian governments as well as through private enterprises. Presently the G3 set of guidelines has been elaborated (GRI, 2011, see Annex I). A new set is in preparation (G4).

- The International Finance Corporation (IFC), tied to World Bank, but financially independent, finances private enterprises in developing countries. IFC developed a range of tools to assist its clients improve environmental and social management performance, incorporating earlier Environmental and Health & Safety (EHS) Guidelines. This IFC Sustainability Framework consists of the Environmental and Social Review Procedures and a corresponding manual (IFC 2009-2010) and a set of Performance Standards and Guidance Notes (see Annex I). An updated set has been prepared (IFC 1012) and is presently translated in different languages. Connected with World Bank is also the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA), adopting in 2007 its Policy on Social and Environmental Sustainability and Performance, using a similar framework.

- The Association of European Development Finance Institutions (EDFI), in the framework of their Principles on Responsible Financing (EDFI, 2009) agreed on harmonized Environmental and Social Standards, especially regarding any project financed through the European Financing Partners S.A. (EFP) facility. These standards encompass (a) Environmental and Social Category Definitions, (b) Requirements for Environmental and Social Due Diligence, Environmental and Social Contractual Requirements and Monitoring and (c) an Exclusion List. Benchmarks for the EDFI members are the UN Declaration of Human Rights, the ILO Core Conventions and the IFC Performance Standards on Economic and Social Sustainability and associated EHS Guidelines (EDFI, 2009).

- Private sector banks (led by Citigroup, ABN AMRO, Barclays and WestLB) developed and launched the Equator Principles (Equator Principles, 2006), especially used for project financing. The banks chose to model them combining the environmental standards of the World Bank and the social policies of IFC. Adopted by many financial institutions (the EPFI), the Equator Principles have become the de facto standard for banks and investors on how to assess major development projects around the world.

The above mentioned organizations regularly document cases with enterprises improving their TBL impact, but cases documenting how the guidelines have been applied are rare.

Several sets of guidelines have been developed on national levels or by individual financing organizations, often in connection with the above mentioned guidelines. Most do subject clients to a Risk Categorization of their (potential) Environmental and Social impacts (e.g. high, medium high, medium and low risk). The categorization is often based on an assessment against the applicable (IFC) Environmental and Social Performance Standards. In Europe they are also harmonized with definitions and requirements with the European 3 www.globalreporting.org

7

Development Finance Institutions (EDFI’s) especially in the framework of its Corporate Governance Methodology. Two examples are presented here:

- CDC (UK’s Development Finance Institution, wholly owned by the UK Government’s Department for International Development) developed a toolkit on environmental, social and government (ESG) management (CDC, 2010). The Investment Code is also compatible with the 2007 agreement for common environmental and social standards among the European Development Finance Institutions (“EDFI Rome Consensus”)

- The Netherlands Development Finance Company (FMO) adopted the Equator Principles not only for project finance transactions but for corporate finance as well. FMO developed a slightly adapted set (FMO, 2010). Clients are subject to a risk categorization of their impacts as mentioned above.

2.2 Life Cycle Assessment

A life cycle approach allows understanding how choices influence what happens at each of the points in the cycle so as to balance trade-offs and positively impact the economy, the environment and the society. This way of thinking helps recognizing how individual choices and actions are one part of a whole system. Overall, life cycle thinking can promote a more sustainable rate of consumption and production and a more efficient use of limited financial and natural resources (UNEP, 2008).

Life cycle thinking expands the established concept of cleaner production to include the complete product life cycle and its sustainability, e.g. using the “6 RE Philosophy” (UNEP, 2005a):

- RE-think - the product and its functions.- RE-pair - make the product easy to repair.- RE-place - harmful substances with safer alternatives.- RE-use - design the product for disassembly so part can be reused.- RE-duce - energy, material consumption and socio-economic impacts throughout a

product’s life cycle.- RE-cycle - select materials that can be recycled.

Mostly, life cycle assessments (LCA) are focused on the investigation and valuation of the environmental impacts of a given product or service caused or necessitated by its existence. Consequently, social implications of products are generally lacking in LCAs. Also impacts from the commerce responsible for goods and services (telephone, business travel, offices) are not frequently considered. Thus LCA succeeds in accurately measuring the environmental impacts of the technology used for delivering products, but not the whole impact of making the economic choice of using it. Life-cycle analysis often concerns analyzing commensurable aspects of quantifiable systems. Not every factor, however, can be reduced to a number and inserted into a model.

Other terms and concepts used in life cycle thinking are:

Cradle-to-graveCradle-to-grave is the full Life Cycle Assessment from manufacture ('cradle') to use phase and disposal phase ('grave'). For example, trees produce paper, which is recycled into low-energy production cellulose insulation, then used as an energy-saving device in the ceiling of a home for 40 years, saving 2,000 times the fossil-fuel energy used in its production. After 40 years the cellulose fibers are replaced and the old fibres are disposed of, possibly incinerated. All inputs and outputs are considered for all the phases of the life cycle.

Cradle-to-gateCradle-to-gate is an assessment of a partial product life cycle from manufacture ('cradle') to the factory gate (i.e., before it is transported to the consumer). The use phase and disposal phase of the product are usually omitted. Often environmental product declarations (EPD) are based on Cradle-to-gate type LCAs (The Green Standard, 2011).

Cradle-to-CradleCradle-to-cradle is a specific kind of cradle-to-grave assessment, where the end-of-life disposal step for the product is a new production process. From this process originate identical products (e.g. glass bottles from collected glass bottles) or new products (e.g. glass wool insulation from collected glass bottles), preferably of higher quality.

8

Gate-to-GateGate-to-Gate is a partial LCA looking at only one value-added process in the entire production chain.

Economic Input-Output Life Cycle AssessmentEconomic Input-Output LCA (EIO-LCA) involves use of aggregate sector-level data on how much environmental impact can be attributed to each sector of the economy and how much each sector purchases from other sectors. Such analysis can account for long and complex chains (for example, building an automobile requires energy, but producing energy requires vehicles and building those vehicles requires energy, etc.). This somewhat alleviates the scoping problem of process LCA; however, EIO-LCA relies on sector-level averages that may or may not be representative of the specific subset of the sector relevant to a particular product and therefore is not suitable for evaluating the environmental impacts of products (see e.g. the EOI-LCA net, 2011).

Hybrid LCAs are blending data from EIO and process-based models. For example, one might use process LCA to capture all of the aspects that can be measured within the scope of the study and use EIO-LCA to capture the supply chain outside of the system boundary.

Life cycle energy analysisLife cycle energy analysis (LCEA, earlier Energy Analysis) confines to all energy inputs to a product, not only direct energy inputs during manufacture, but also all energy inputs needed to produce components, materials and services needed for the manufacturing process. The total life cycle energy input for a product is established (see e.g. for agricultural products: Gustafson, 2011 and for buildings: WSGA, 2005).

Life cycle matter analysisAlthough not referred to as a specific method, different studies used an approach similar to life cycle energy analysis for required matter inputs during the life cycle, especially water requirements (e.g. for production and consumption of cotton: Chapagain et al., 2005; Environmental Justice Foundation, undated) or soil nutrient requirements (e.g. nutrient inputs in biodiesel production: Yang et al., 2011).

Both types of analyses are often used in footprint calculations (see chapter 3.1).

Implementation resources

Apart from the earlier mentioned resources, the LCA procedures are part of the ISO 14000 and 14001 environmental management standards (ISO, 2004), which have been renewed in 2006 making the ISO 14040 and ISO 14044 standards (ISO, 2006ab).

9

Figure 3 Life Cycle Management is connecting various operational concepts and tools.Source UNEP, 2007.

2.3 Life Cycle Management (LCM)

Life Cycle Management (LCM) is an integrated concept coming from the industrial sector (mostly referred to as Product Life Cycle Management) to assist businesses in managing the total life cycle of products and services towards more sustainable consumption and production patterns. In general the approach aims to arrive more quickly to concrete activities. It connects several operational concepts and tools (figure 3).

LCM is being used by businesses to support their goals of providing products which are as sustainable as possible, minimizing environmental and socio-economic burdens associated with an organization’s product during its entire life cycle and value chain (Hunkeler 2004-2008). There are five main characteristics:

1. LCM is the application of life cycle thinking to modern business practice with the aim to manage the total life cycle of an organization’s products and services towards more sustainable consumption and production

2. LCM is systematic integration of sustainability, e.g. in company strategy and planning, product design and development, purchasing decisions and communication programs

3. LCM is not a single tool or methodology but a flexible integrated management framework of concepts, techniques and procedures incorporating environmental, economic, and social aspects of products, processes and organizations

4. LCM is voluntary and can be gradually adapted to the specific needs and characteristics of individual organizations

5. LCM is a dynamic process; organizations may begin with small goals and objectives with the resources they have and get more ambitious over time.

Compared to a full life cycle assessment, LCM does not require so much resource-intensive data which usually is difficult to obtain in most developing and transitional countries. An organization needs not “jump into” tools like LCA, but instead take a step-by-step approach and begin with focusing on the life cycle perspective and on concrete possibilities to improve the environmental characteristics of a product. Therefore LCM is easier to implement for smaller enterprises.

Ventures may gradually expand their facility-focused environmental management systems to an integrated management system that incorporates product life cycle thinking as well as interaction with internal and external stakeholders of the organization. Communication and cooperation between the partners involved will build connections between the supply chain and the value chain. A Life Cycle Management system is for continuous improvement based on a life cycle perspective (figure 4).

10

Introducing LCM into an organization should be a policy decision which comes from the managerial level and is integral to the organization’s policies and strategy (UNEP, 2007). Participation of a range of employees and stakeholders ensures that the LCM initiatives will be deeply rooted in the organization and that the focus will be on concrete improvements to a product’s sustainability profile. Furthermore, broad participation ensures that the LCM program does not “die”, if a key employee involved leaves the company.

A LCM initiative may impact all stages in the value chain, suppliers, distributors, vendors and customers. Therefore, all relevant functions among the value chain must participate positively. Communication and exchange of ideas within and across the relevant functions and stakeholders is a key to success, helping to push ideas into realization.

Building-up the needed capacity in-house often leads to better and more grounded results compared to using external competences to handle the process.

Implementation resources

The implementation of Life Cycle Management is well described by UNEP (2007) in the business guide to sustainability and is also part of the renewed ISO environmental management standards (ISO 14040 and ISO 14044 standards, 2006ab).

Specific guidelines and experiences in the field of technology development and innovation are found in the Design for Sustainability approach (UNEP, 2006a).

11

Communication and collaboration

Materials and Energy

Money and Information

Figure 4 Collaboration in the Product Chain. Source UNEP, 2007.

3 Specific methodologies in the Planet domain

3.1 Ecological Footprints

The ecological footprint is a measure of human demand on the Earth's ecosystems. It compares human demand with planet Earth's ecological capacity to regenerate. It represents the amount of biologically productive land and sea area needed to regenerate the resources a human population consumes and to absorb and render harmless the corresponding waste. Using this assessment, it is possible to estimate how much of the Earth (or how many planet Earths) it would take to support humanity if everybody lived a given lifestyle. For 2007, humanity's total ecological footprint was estimated at 1.5 planet Earths - in other words, humanity uses ecological services 1.5 times faster than Earths can renew them (Global Footprint Network, 2011a). Every year this number is recalculated with a three year lag due to the time it takes the UN to collect all the underlying statistics.

While the term ecological footprint is widely used, methods of measurement vary. Calculation standards are now emerging to make results more comparable and consistent. Ecological footprint for different nations compared to their Human Development Index (HDI). Recent evidence suggests that improvements in the HDI in most cases generally results in an increase in its ecological footprint (Global Footprint Network, 2011b).

Ecological footprint analysis compares human demand on nature with the biosphere's ability to regenerate resources and provide services. It does this by assessing the biologically productive land and marine area required to produce the resources a population consumes and absorb the corresponding waste, using prevailing technology. Footprint values at the end of a survey are categorized for Carbon, Food, Housing, and Goods and Services as well as the total footprint number of Earths needed to sustain the world's population at that level of consumption. This approach can also be applied to an activity such as the manufacturing of a product or driving of a car. This resource accounting is similar to life cycle analysis wherein the consumption of energy, biomass (food, fiber), building material, water and other resources are converted into a normalized measure of land area called 'global hectares' (gha).

Per capita ecological footprint (EF) is a means of comparing consumption and lifestyles, and checking this against nature's ability to provide for this consumption. The tool can inform policy by examining to what extent a nation uses more (or less) than is available within its territory, or to what extent the nation's lifestyle would be replicable worldwide. The footprint can also be a useful tool to educate people about carrying capacity and over-consumption, with the aim of altering personal behaviour. Ecological footprints may be used to argue that many current lifestyles are not sustainable. Such a global comparison clearly shows the inequalities of resource use on this planet. Ecological footprinting is now widely used around the globe as an indicator of environmental sustainability. It can be used to measure and manage the use of resources and to explore the sustainability of individual lifestyles, goods and services, organizations, industry sectors, neighbourhoods, cities, regions and nations.

Just like for life cycle assessment, for main energy or matter flows specific footprints are made. Carbon accounting has become important as it has been part of various international agreements. Emissions of different greenhouse gases are converted in CO2 equivalent weights with their respective equivalent factors (see section 3.5). Many financing organizations and governments developed procedures and guidelines (e.g. Scottish Environment Link, 2008; WRI and WBCSD, 2011; Australian Government, 2011).

Implementation resources

Since 2006, a first set of ecological footprint standards exist that detail both communication and calculation procedures (Global Footprint Network, 2006). Specific footprint networks exist, such as the Water Foot Print Network4 which also presents assessment manuals and calculators. Guidelines are elaborate and not always easy to follow for small and medium enterprises, especially not those in developing countries. For specific purpose like for carbon accounting, easier guidelines have been developed. For example the UK government, 4 http://www.waterfootprint.org/?page=files/home

12

through its Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs developed guidelines for the British industry with a special small business user guide (DEFRA, 2011). A guide for developing carbon credit projects, especially in southern countries, has been prepared recently (Arnoldus and Bymolt, 2011).

3.2 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)

An environmental impact assessment (EIA) is an assessment of the possible impact —which can either be positive or negative — that a proposed project (infrastructure, energy and industrial projects) may have on the natural environment. The purpose of the assessment is to ensure that decision makers consider the ensuing environmental impacts to decide whether to proceed with the project. An environmental impact assessment is "the process of identifying, predicting, evaluating and mitigating the biophysical, and other relevant effects of development proposals prior to major decisions being taken and commitments made.” After an EIA, the precautionary and polluter pays principles may be applied to prevent, limit, or require strict liability or insurance coverage to a project, based on its likely harms.

Normally, the biophysical parameters being assessed during an EIA are land use, water (ground water, surface water), soil, air/climate, flora and fauna/biodiversity, landscape, heritage/archaeological sites, human aspects.

An Environmental Impact Assessment is a participatory planning methodology, involving right from the beginning all relevant stakeholders in the entire planning process. Depending on the scale of the project the whole assessment can take several years. An EIA is a very well thought-through methodology and internationally widely accepted. An EIA is mainly implemented in infrastructure projects (e.g. highways, dams, waterways, power stations). EIAs require sound legal frameworks on national/subnational level addressing environmental issues. They require a detailed data base (geological maps, meteorological/hydrological data, flora/fauna eg.) and specialists.

Implementation resources

As environmental impact assessments are required for larger projects and works, depending on the governing institution, their format and the information required may vary. For example, to comply under the EU directive, an EIA must provide information on seven key areas (EC, 1997):

1. Description of actual project and site, break down into key components (construction, operations, decommissioning). Per component, list of sources of environmental disturbance and list of all inputs and outputs (e.g. air pollution, noise, hydrology).

2. Description of alternatives that have been considered (e.g. in a biomass power station, will the fuel be sourced locally or nationally).

3. Description of the environment affected (populations, fauna, flora, air, soil, water, humans, landscape, cultural heritage).

4. Description of the significant effects on the environment (Includes a how the word significant has been defined. The most frequent method used here is use of the Leopold Matrix, used in the systematic examination of potential interactions).

5. Mitigation (using information of previous sections to avoid negative impacts) 6. Non-technical summary (EIS). The EIA will be in the public domain and be used in the

decision making process, making information available and readable to the public (without jargon or complicated diagrams)

7. Areas where know-how is lacking and technical difficulties can be expected (used to focus future research)

As a methodology an EIA is not suitable for micro projects, but some evaluation measures can be used in a kind of descriptive “rapid environment scan” (e.g. impact of possible oil leakages on groundwater/surface water fishery income generation; possible impact of air pollutionhealth child mortality school enrollment). In 2009 the EC evaluated the application and effectiveness of the EIA Directive (EC, 2009a) and indicated that the instrument could be subject to a simplification exercise.

13

Under United States environmental law Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) and Environmental Assessments (EA) are used, the latter to determine the need for the former (EPA, 2011). Both mainly are used in public decision making.

3.3 Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA)

Originally Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) has been considered as a systematic process for evaluating the environmental consequences of proposed policy, plan or programme initiatives in order to ensure they are fully included and appropriately addressed at the earliest appropriate stage of decision-making on par with economic and social considerations (Sadler & Verheem, 1996). Later on definitions shifted to include social consequences and to include a participatory approach (World Bank, 2005a).

It is sometimes referred to as Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment. The specific term Strategic Environmental Assessment relates to European Union policy.

SEA introduces environmental considerations into decision making early, before project location and scale decisions have been made. Also, SEA allows decision makers to focus on the environmental effects of strategic choices, before specific projects are considered.

Compared to a project-level EIA, a SEA can consider a broader range of alternativeproposals and mitigation measures (ADB, undated). For example, an EIA of a new fossil fuel energy generation plant will be unlikely to consider other energy generating possibilities and will probably be prepared by the project proponent with a vested interest in project approval. At best, an EIA will describe a “no or without project” option. This will often serve only to motivate the proposal rather than provide adequate consideration of the full range of options. By addressing choices upstream of projects in the realm of Policies, Plans and Programmes, SEA is able to consider a far richer array of development options.

Ideally, a SEA is conducted before a corresponding EIA is undertaken. This will mean that information on the environmental impact of a plan will be able to cascade down through the tiers of decision making and be used in an EIA at a later stage. This should reduce the amount of work that needs to be undertaken. A handover procedure is foreseen.

SEA will contribute to more transparent planning by involving the public in integrating environmental considerations. This will help to achieve the goal of sustainable development and participation.

A SEA is normally implemented in the following phases (ENSEA, 2011):1. Screening, investigation of whether the plan or programme falls under the SEA

legislation, 2. Scoping, defining the boundaries of investigation, assessment and assumptions

required, 3. Documenting the state of the environment, effectively a baseline on which to base

judgments, 4. Determination of the likely (non-marginal) environmental impacts, usually in terms of

Direction of Change rather than firm figures, 5. Informing and consulting the public, 6. Influencing decision making based on the assessment and, 7. Monitoring the effects of plans and programmes after their implementation.

Similar to EIA, a SEA requires sound legal frameworks on various levels of government.

Although SEAs are intended to be used in a wider policy framework, they are also being applied to larger projects - mainly bigger infrastructure projects (highways, dams, waterways, power stations eg.) having huge impacts not only on the environment but also on social issues. In China and Brazil SEAs have been conducted in connection with hydroelectric power plants. SEA’s are still too sophisticated for micro-scale projects but some general checklists could be used (see e.g. OECD 2008a).

Implementation resources

There is a wide range of manuals describing the ways to perform SEAs. These include: - The formally required standards in Europe (EC, 2010).

14

- Several books have been written on the topic (Therivel et al, 1992, 1996, 2004; Dalal-Clayton and Sadler, 1999; Rosário Partidário et al, 2000; Caratti et al, 2004; Jones et al, 2005; OECD, 2006; Fisher, 2007).

- OECDs (2008a) “Natural Resources and Pro-poor Growth” gives an overview of environmental issues in pro-poor development that could function as a checklist. It demonstrates that natural resources can contribute to growth, employment, exports and fiscal revenues and comprises two parts: (I) an overview of the economics and politics of natural resources and (II) details on seven key natural resources for pro-poor growth (fisheries, forests, wildlife and ecotourism, soil productivity, water security, minerals and renewable energy).

- OECD (2008b). Strategic Environmental Assessment and adaptation to climate change discusses tools and guidelines to address climate change issues (Annex 3).

- Guidelines for specific impact assessments e.g. on biodiversity (CREM, 2000).

3.4 Integrated Environmental and Economic Accounting (SEEA)

The System of Integrated Environmental and Economic Accounting has been developed by UN, EC, IMF, OECD and World Bank to provide policymakers with a common framework for economic and environmental information, permitting a consistent analysis of the contribution of the environment to the economy and of the impact of the economy on the environment (UN et al, 2003). The system uses a capital approach to sustainable development, which is most closely associated with the thinking of economists on the subject. Natural capital is then considered to comprise three principal assets: natural resource stocks, land and ecosystems.

The SEEA is set up as a satellite system of the United Nations System of National Accounts (SNA). It comprises four categories of accounts.

1. Purely physical data relating to flows of materials and energy, marshalled as far as possible according to the accounting structure of the SNA. The accounts in this category also show how flow data in physical and monetary terms can be combined to produce so-called “hybrid” flow accounts (e.g. greenhouse gases).

2. Elements of the existing SNA which are relevant to the good management of the environment and shows how the environment-related transactions can be made more explicit (e.g. expenditures made by businesses, governments and households to protect the environment).

3. Environmental assets measured in physical and monetary terms (e.g. timber stock accounts showing opening and closing timber balances and the related changes over the course of an accounting period).

4. Adjustments of the existing SNA for the impact of the economy on the environment (adjustments for depletion, for so-called defensive expenditures and for degradation).

Implementation resources

The handbook (UN et al, 2003) gives detailed guidelines on how to quantify environmental effects and impacts. Since the approach uses, besides physical accounts also monetary accounts, there is a special section on valuing environmental impact in monetary terms.

In Europe a legal base for this approach passed in 2011 (EU, 2011a). It contains three modules that EU countries need to conform to: Air emission accounts, Environmental related taxes by industry and Economy-wide material flow accounts. While the SEEA could provide a framework for private sector enterprises as well, it is not used as such.

15

4 Supporting strategies and methodsPublic and private partners in value chains use various strategies and methods for improving social and environmental sustainability of their activities. Some are resumed in the next sections.

4.1 Corporate Social Responsibility

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is defined as “a concept whereby companies integrate social and environmental concerns in their business operations and in their interaction with their stakeholders on a voluntary basis” (EU, 2009b). The term “responsible entrepreneurship” refers to ensuring the economic success of a business by the inclusion of social and environmental considerations into a company’s operation. It means satisfying customer’s demands, whilst managing the expectations of the employees, the suppliers and the community around the enterprise. It also means contributing positively to society and managing the enterprise’s environmental impacts. CSR is a win-win scenario, bringing direct benefits to a venture and securing its long-term competitiveness.

Responsible entrepreneurship is essentially about maintaining economic success and achieving commercial advantage by building reputation and gaining the trust of the people that or live around the company, because (EU, undated):

- ventures/customers want a reliable supplier with a good reputation for quality products and services,

- suppliers want to sell to a venture/customer that will return for repeat purchases and will make payments in a timely manner,

- the community around the venture wants to be confident that the business operates in a socially and environmentally responsible way, and

- employees want to work for a company of which they are proud, and that they know values their contribution.

To become and remain competitive, companies would need to be able to adapt to these new demands from the market and the society in which they operate. Ventures, addressing this issue for the first time normally start small, focusing on something that is immediately relevant to the company and that can be achieved. Communicate the process amongst various stakeholders is important (see next paragraph).

Governments promote CSR, envisaging a sustainable, competitive and social market economy. They designed policies to stimulate CSR (e.g. EC, 2011).

Implementation resources

Various guides exist on the implementation of Corporate Social Responsibility, for example- CSR: An Implementation Guide for Business (IISD, 2007)- CSR: An Implementation Guide for Canadian Business (Industry Canada, 2011)- Corporate social responsibility (UK Business Link, 2011)- Guide to Corporate Social Responsibility by Sustainable Sanitation and Water

Management (SSWM, 2011)- A guide to communicating about CSR (EC, undated)

Also international standards exist (ISO, 2010: standard 26000), which are intended to assist organizations in contributing to sustainable development, promoting a common understanding in the field of social responsibility.

Case studies are presented by various sources (e.g. The Times, Undated). Private enterprises are linking in various platforms on CSR, e.g. CSR Europe’s National Partner Network (CSR Europe, 2010), the World Business Council for Sustainable Development5, or not-for profit groups (e.g. Business in the Community, a UK group6).

4.2 Stakeholder engagement

5 http://www.wbcsd.org/home.aspx6 http://www.bitc.org.uk

16

The concept “stakeholder engagement” is closely associated to Corporate Social Responsibility and has been further developed e.g. by UNEP (UNEP 2005bc).

Sound stakeholder engagement is considered fundamental to successful business. Stakeholder involvement accounts for participation, communication, accountability and transparency. Effective stakeholder engagement contributes to organizational resilience and flexibility, to learning and innovation, to the identification of new opportunities and finally to the improvement of sustainable performance. Stakeholder engagement is valued as a tool

- for developing understanding of what sustainability means for companies;- for risk/opportunity management, minimizing costs and creation value.

Even small ventures are increasingly aware of the interconnections and complexity of environmental, social and economic issues and recognize they cannot act alone in this area. Coordinated efforts are required with multiple stakeholders contributing to innovative and sustainable solutions that enhance the value for everybody involved.

Ventures are exposed to and engaged with a great number and variety of stakeholders. Companies often start by defining a narrow group of key stakeholders with whom they seek to engage but those relationships are neither static nor uniform. Stakeholders can be divided into primary and secondary stakeholders (UNEP, 2005b):

Primary stakeholders: Secondary stakeholders: employees and managers trade associations suppliers labour unions distributors civil society and NGOs customers regulating institutions competitors investors and/or business partners local community public bodies (local governments)

Stakeholders can engage in various ways, depending on the goals they want to achieve. Their engagement can start with simple one-way communication, basic consultation, advancing into in-depth dialogue and finally reaching a level as far as working partnerships.

Stakeholders are grouped according to their functions (UNEP, 2005c, see also figure 5):

1. By responsibility: people/groups to whom ventures have, or in the future may have, legal, financial and operational responsibilities enshrined in regulations, contracts, policies or codes of practice.

2. By influence: people/groups that are, or in the future may be, able to influence the ability of the company to meet its goals. These can include those with informal influence and those with formal decision making power.

3. By proximity: people/groups a venture interacts with most, including internal stakeholders, those with longstanding relationships, those a company depends on in its day-to-day operations, and those living next to the production site.

4. By dependency: people/groups that are most dependent on a venture. Employees and their families, or customers who are dependent on the company’s product.

5. By representation: people/groups that are through regulatory structures or culture/tradition entrusted to represent other individuals, such as councillors, trade union representatives, representatives of membership based organizations, etc.

Those groups are not static - they are interchangeable during the life cycle process. Suppliers may be considered as primary stakeholders during the production stage, but not anymore during the distribution stage while gaining growing importance at the final stage, the disposal phase.

17

Implementation resources

Since stakeholder engagement is closely associated to Corporate Social Responsibility most of the CSR implementation resources are treating stakeholder engagement as well.

Specific guidelines and standards have been developed for stakeholder engagement, frequently as a part of CSR guidelines, as there are:

- AA1000 Stakeholder Engagement Standard 2011 (AccountAbility, 2011)- Stakeholder Engagement: A Good Practice Handbook for Companies Doing

Business in Emerging Markets (IFC, 2007)- International Standard Social Accountability 8000 (SAI, 2008).

4.3 The five milestone approach

To implement part of the Local Agenda/Local Action 21, in 1990 the 'International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives' (ICEI) was founded. The Council was established by more than 200 local governments from 43 countries. Later it adopted the name 'ICLEI - Local Governments for Sustainability' with a broader mandate to address sustainability issues. Integrating the earlier described concepts in the so called ‘Five Milestone Approach’ ICLEI addresses sustainability issues through the following four principles:

- The Triple Bottom Line (TBL) as the overarching perspective,- The Life Cycle Thinking perspective, - The Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) perspective, and- The Stakeholder Perspective.

The guidelines, combining the different perspectives into one methodology, provide practical and easy to follow steps (quick scan – milestone approach steps 1-2) by referring to a range of “analytical and participatory approaches that aim to integrate environmental considerations and evaluate the inter linkages with economic and social considerations” (milestone approach steps 3-5).

The steps to be followed are ensuring a continuous improvement in environmental, social and economic performance based upon formulating and implementing an Action Plan for sustainable procurement, monitoring its implementation, reviewing progress and the making of necessary changes (figure 6).

18

Stakeholderswho areaffected by your organisation'soperations.

People who are likely to influence your organisation's performance(those with influence and decisionmakers)

People you havelegal, financial or operationalresponsibilities to.

Figure 1 Mapping stakeholders. Source UNEP, 2005c.

The steps are:1 Preparation

- Establishing a team- Conducting scoping review – identification of stakeholders

2 Target setting- Setting institutional framework (mission statement)- Selecting priority areas, defining objectives and targets

3 Develop Action Plan- Approve targets and put into an action plan

4 Implement Action Plan- For example: energy efficiency improvements, water treatment facilities,

streetlight retrofits, renewable power applications, methane recovery from waste management

- Include activities enabling impact assessment: mapping, measuring, comparing5 Monitor progress and report results

- Document, monitor and evaluate- Sustaining and improving

Small ventures do not need to have the knowledge about existing tools and methodologies - they just follow the different steps by applying a checklist/questionnaire. The steps as well as the checklists/questionnaire can be applied likewise for suppliers, producers, distributors and consumers.

Implementation resources

The five milestone approach is documented by various ICLEI offices. ICLEI USA provides websites with the basics of the approach (ICLEI USA (Undated_ab). ICLEI Canada published a more elaborate version (ICLEI Canada, 2010).

Originally the five milestone approach was used by local governments for public planning (eg, Cities for Climate Protection Milestone Guide, ICLEI, 2007). An example is the plan made for the town of Bouctouche in Canada (Whitford, 2008), but also see the sustainability planning of New York (ICLEI USA, 2010).

Through ICLEI projects, local governments also developed more specific guidelines, as those for sustainable procurement, for example:

- The Procura+ Manual. A guide to cost-effective sustainable public procurement (ICLEI Europe, 2007a).

- Guide on Socially Responsible Procurement of Textiles and Clothing (ICLEI Europe, 2007b).

- Driving energy efficient innovation through procurement. A practical guide for public authorities (ICLEI Europe, 2011).

4.4 Eco-labelling and social labelling

19

Figure 6 Milestone process (ICLEI, 2007)

Rather than aligning with the polluter pays principle, where the costs of pollution are integrated into higher product prices (usually through taxes), eco-labelling encourages decreased emissions and reduced environmental impact, the extra cost of which is passed on to the consumer in a price premium for the producer. As a result, widely acknowledged benefits of eco-labelling for producers being certified include potential for premium market prices, access to new markets, safeguarding of existing market channels, preferred supplier status, potential to attract ethical investment in the sector as well as (co)funding of local community social and economic infrastructure.

The spread of environmental requirements, including eco-labelling and other types of standards, is expected to continue to increase due to the increasing health, safety & sustainability concerns and targeted purchases of private market actors, particularly through supply chain contracts and big retail chains (UNEP, 2006d; Smith et al., 2010; Paull, 2009). Eco-labelling is seen by many producers and manufacturers as an opportunity to seek value-based distinction over a cost-based advantage.

Eco-labels are increasingly used to define commercial relationships between producers and buyers. Labelling such Marine Steward Council (MSC) labelling on Fisheries, Forest Steward Council (FSC) on wood and forest resources are increasingly sought by big supermarkets as Sainsburys, Tescos and Wal-mart (Sustainable Enterprise, 2008. E.g. Wal-mart has pledged to stock only MSC seafood within five years).

Eco-labels are also intended to educate and increase consumer awareness of the environmental impacts of a product and bring about environmental protection by encouraging consumers to buy products with a lower environmental impact. Consumers include individual retail consumers, as well as the procurement officers of governments and large corporations. Consumers’ purchasing decisions can provide a market signal to producers about product preferences. Under effective eco-labelling regimes, producers and sellers have an incentive to compete to improve the products, perhaps by changing inputs or adopting different technologies to lower the environmental burden of the product. Producers of environmentally superior products have an incentive to use environmental marketing techniques such as eco-labelling to differentiate their products. Firms may be motivated by gaining extra market share, improving their public image or preempting mandatory labelling requirements, but trust in the label is essential for consumers.

Social labels are mostly dealing with Fair Trade or Ethical Trade (Zadek et al, 1998). Fair Trade aims to strengthen the economic position of marginalized producers, e.g. small farmers, in trading chains while Ethical Trade (also called ‘Sound Sourcing’, ‘No Sweat’ etc..) aims to ensure that conditions within mainstream production chains meet basic minimum standards and that the most exploitative forms of labour such as child and bonded labour and ‘sweatshops’ are avoided. The criteria for Fair Trade marked products differ between products but cover issues such as guaranteed prices, pre-payment, direct payment to growers or their co-operatives. Ethical Trade labelling criteria are generally based on core ILO conventions (for example on child and forced labour, see chapter 4.5).

Presently most eco-labels include social aspects as well.

Implementation resources

Eco-labelling systems exist for both food and consumer products. Both systems were started by NGOs and private sector enterprises, but nowadays the European Union have legislation for the rules of eco-labelling and also have their own eco-labels through the European Union Eco-labelling Board, one for food and one for consumer products (EU, 2011b). At least for food, the eco-label is nearly identical with the common NGO definition of the rules for eco-labelling.

Key examples are the Fairtrade label, the Forest Stewardship Council for the forestry sector and the Marine Stewardship Council for fish products, the RSPO (Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil) label and in energy e.g. the blue ENERGY STAR label. Labels concerning child labour were introduced by product (e.g. in rug trade, the rugmark label) or by region (e.g. the Abrinq Child Friendly Company Seal introduced in Brasil7).

Many have become well known consumer brands as well as key supplier filters for global buyers. This has led to the emergence of "standards for standards" whereby the

7 Abrinq : http://internacional.fundabrinq.org.br/index.php/en, see e.g. annual report 2010.

20

organizations setting voluntary labels adhere to guidelines laid down by wider stakeholder bodies such as the ISEAL Alliance, a global association for social and environmental standards. Presently there are ISEAL Codes - of Good Practice for Assessing the Impacts of Social and Environmental Standards- of Good Practice for Assuring Compliance with Social and Environmental Standards

in Government and Business (ISEAL, 2010).

There are a number of eco-labelling initiatives operating in Africa (UNEP, undated), the majority are international eco-labelling schemes relevant to a sector (i.e. fisheries, forestry, organic agriculture, etc.), and used by African products or services, although there are some that are eco-labels specific to the region. A number of sector eco-labelling schemes are being implemented on a regional basis such as the East African Organic Standard and the West African Organic Cotton initiatives. There is currently only one national eco-labelling scheme in operation in Africa, which is the Tunisian Eco-label. A further national eco-labelling scheme is under development in South Africa. There are also a number of national energy-efficiency appliance labelling schemes which have been initiated in African countries.

4.5 ILO’s Decent Work Agenda

Since 1919, the International Labour Organization has maintained and developed a system of international labour standards aimed at promoting opportunities for women and men to obtain decent and productive work, in conditions of freedom, equity, security and dignity.

“The rules of the global economy should be aimed at improving the rights, livelihoods, security, and opportunities of people, families and communities around the world. The continued development of the global economy in its present direction is neither sustainable nor desirable. Inequality not only leads to a decline in productivity but also breeds poverty, social instability and even conflict” (World Commission on the Social Dimension of Globalization, 2004). In view of this, the international community has recognized the need to establish some basic rules of the game to ensure that globalization offers a fair chance at prosperity for everyone. Thus, international labour standards are essential for ensuring that the growth of the global economy benefits to all.

Implementation resources

Today, the ILO has developed a comprehensive Decent Work Agenda which takes up many of the same challenges that the organization faced at its inception. The Decent Work Agenda aims to achieve decent work for all by promoting social dialogue, social protection and employment creation, as well as respect for international labour standards. The standards have grown into a comprehensive system of instruments on work and social policy, backed by a supervisory system designed to address all sorts of problems in their application at the national level. They are the legal component in the ILO's strategy for governing globalization, promoting sustainable development, eradicating poverty, and ensuring that people can work in dignity and safety.

ILO’s Decent Work Agenda concerns four main areas:- Employment creation (see vision paper, ILO, 2006)- Rights at work (see e.g. labour standards, ILO, 2011a)- Social dialogue (help design and implement national policies, including issues of

freedom of association. ILO 2011b). - Social protection (see e.g. The Social Protection Floor Initiative, ILO, 2011c)

Decent Work Country Programmes have been established as the main vehicle for delivery of ILO support to countries. For ILO managers and staff there is a guidebook for development and implementation these programs (ILO, 2008). As UN organization ILO addresses other UN staff for the implementation of the Decent Work Agenda (UN CEB, 2007). ILO also promotes Regional policies (e.g. for Africa, ILO, 2007).

Connected to the Decent Work Agenda are specialized publications and guides. E.g. for the agricultural sector

- Ergonomic Checkpoints in Agriculture (ILO, 2011d)- Safety and Health in Agriculture. Code of practice (ILO, 2011e)

but also on policy and labour market regulation (ILO, 2011f).

21

4.6 Standardization in Production and Consumption

A number of standards in the field of sustainable production and consumption have been indicated in the foregoing sections. Generally standards ensure desirable characteristics of products and services such as quality, environmental friendliness, safety, reliability, efficiency and interchangeability - and at an economical cost. Many standards have been developed by national standardization bureaus. In 1947, the International Federation of the National Standardizing Associations and the United Nations Standards Coordinating Committee joined to establish the International Organization for Standardization (ISO).

While ISO defines itself as a non-governmental organization, its ability to set standards that often become law, either through treaties or national standards, makes it more powerful than most non-governmental organizations. In practice, ISO acts as a consortium setting industrial and technological standards with strong links to governments.

ISO standards provide technological, economic and societal benefits for:- businesses, the widespread adoption of International Standards means that

suppliers can develop and offer products and services meeting specifications that have wide international acceptance in their sectors. Therefore, businesses using International Standards can compete on many more markets around the world

- innovators of new technologies, International Standards on aspects like terminology, compatibility and safety speed up the dissemination of innovations and their development into manufacturable and marketable products.

- customers, the worldwide compatibility of technology which is achieved when products and services are based on International Standards gives them a broad choice of offers. They also benefit from the effects of competition among suppliers

- governments, International Standards provide the technological and scientific bases underpinning health, safety and environmental legislation.

- trade officials, International Standards create "a level playing field" for all competitors on those markets. The existence of divergent national or regional standards can create technical barriers to trade. International Standards are the technical means by which political trade agreements can be put into practice.

- developing countries, International Standards that represent an international consensus on the state of the art are an important source of technological know-how. By defining the characteristics that products and services will be expected to meet on export markets, International Standards give developing countries a basis for making the right decisions when investing their scarce resources and thus avoid squandering them.

- consumers, conformity of products and services to International Standards provides assurance about their quality, safety and reliability.

- everyone, International Standards contribute to the quality of life in general by ensuring that the transport, machinery and tools we use are safe.

- the planet we inhabit, International Standards on air, water and soil quality, on emissions of gases and radiation and environmental aspects of products can contribute to efforts to preserve the environment.

ISO standards are developed by technical committee comprising of experts from the industrial, technical and business sectors which have asked for the standards, and which subsequently put them to use. These experts may be joined by representatives of government agencies, testing laboratories, consumer associations, non-governmental organizations and academic circles.

For food and agricultural products, FAO and WHO maintain the Codex Alimentarius (FAO and WHO, 2011). The codex contains

- General texts on Food labelling, Food additives, Contaminants in foods, Pesticide and veterinary chemical residues in foods, Risk assessment procedures for determining the safety of foods derived from biotechnology, Food hygiene (HACCP) and Methods of analysis and sampling

- Specific standards on Meat products, Fish and fishery products, Milk and milk products Foods for special dietary uses, Fresh and processed vegetables, fruits, and fruit juices, Cereals and derived products, dried legumes, Fats, oils and derived products such as margarine, Miscellaneous food products (chocolate, sugar, honey, mineral water).

22

While the system is important in facilitating trade in agricultural products and food safety, it is less used in the framework of sustainable production and consumption, lacking standards for management and organization.

Implementation resources

The vast majority of ISO standards are highly specific to a particular product, material, or process. However, ISO 9001 (quality) and ISO 14001 (environment) are "generic management system standards". "Generic" means that the same standard can be applied to any organization, large or small, whatever its product or service, in any sector of activity, and whether it is a business enterprise, a public administration, or a government department. ISO 9001 contains a generic set of requirements for implementing a quality management system and ISO 14001 for an environmental management system.

The tremendous impact of ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 on organizational practices and on trade has stimulated the development of other ISO standards and deliverables that adapt the generic management system to specific sectors or aspects as there are Automotive,Customer satisfaction, Energy, Food safety, Information security, Supply chain security, Medical devices, Local government, Education, Risk and Ship recycling.

More recently ISO's management standards was joined by ISO 26000:2010, which gives guidance on social responsibility, but does not follow the management system model (it is not a certification standard and thus any claim by an organization to be certified to ISO 26000 is false and organizations should beware of any offers to certify them to the standard).

4.7 Valuation methods for environmental and social assets

Triple Bottom Line improvements in the private sector are normally associated with measurable win-win situations. Reduction of emission of greenhouse gasses is connected with decreasing expenses for energy; fair-trade practices are linked with higher selling prices. Strong environmental and social damages are avoided through standards and laws.

Focussed on win-win situations, only part of the environmental and social cost are taken into account. For instance, cotton farmers in India pay tax for their irrigation water use (proposed tax around US$ 0.0035/m3). This tax could be used to calculate win-win situations of water saving practices for farmers. Yet (Word Bank, 2005b), the real cost for the Indian Government to maintain the availability of irrigation water at its present level would be more than 10 times higher (around US$ 0.04/m3), thus win-win calculations based on actual water price would not reflect the real sustainability of the practices (see also India Environment Portal, 1992 and Indian Government, undated). That accounting for environmental and social costs and benefits is often partial has been reported by various sources (e.g. Karoly, 2008; GatesFoundation, 2008 on the evaluation of social programs). For a private sector enterprise it could be useful to get a complete impression of the environmental and social costs or benefits of its activities, which would help to asses the enterprises’ sustainability and could provide information for publicity and marketing.

However, environmental and social impacts often are not easy to evaluate because of various reasons. In the social domain, value judgment has to do with the value of a life (should one weight the value of a thirty-year old’s life saved or improved more than that of a 70-year old) and with distribution (how much more is an additional dollar to a poor person worth more than an additional dollar to a more wealthy person). Furthermore, in both domains the scope of the analysis (physical and social externalities) and questions of risk and uncertainty (e.g. Pearce & Warford, 1993) are important issues.

How to compare present and future costs and benefits is another long-standing problem. It is widely accepted that costs incurred and benefits secured in the present should have more weight than those expected to arise in the future and that the latter should therefore be discounted to their equivalent present value. In practice this often leads to a situation in which future benefits of environmental and social assets are discounted to such a degree that they do not balance the cost of preservation now and thus are left to future generations. Also, individual decisions may differ from social decisions: individuals, especially the very poor, are relatively short-lived and risk-prone, whereas societies persist for much longer, can spread risk and therefore have less reason to discount the future.

23

Implementation resources

Valuation methods

A wide range of valuation techniques is available to measure value to users of environmental and social goods or services techniques (e.g. FAO-KIT, 2005; The World Bank Environmental Department, 2005; also presents methods for quantifying and valuing health effects; Drakenberg et al., 2009). A brief description of generally used methods is given in annex 2. Choosing a proper technique and concept for valuation, which will depend on what is being measured. Methods try to identify shadow prices: currency values that are attached to each of the short and long-term outcomes of a (social or environmental) program. Shadow prices are typically used in cost-benefit analyses. In some cases, such economic values may be readily obtained, while in others, their derivation may be more complex and subject to debate among experts (e.g. cost of crime for crime victims; there is no market price for this intangible item).

The World Bank Environmental Department (2005) document presents a scheme on the methods that could be used for valuing various environmental effects like degradation, pollution, water depletion or loss of biodiversity.

Accounting methods

Several methods exist that aim to put obtained values in a framework for analysis. Traditional methods are Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA), Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA), Internal Rate of Return (IRR), Net Present Value (NPV) and Return On Investment (ROI) methods.

For the social domain, the ROI method has been refined as the Social Return On Investment (SROI) methodology also including steps in cost effectiveness analysis and several other methodologies (Scholten et al, 2006 in Gates Foundation, 2008; Context, 2006). Presently various networks exist for SROI8. In the social domain indicators have been developed mainly to assess effectiveness of social programs. These include Robin Hood‘s Benefit-Cost Ratio, translating outcomes of diverse programs into a single, monetized value that measures poverty fighting (Weinstein, 2009) and the Hewlett Expected Return methodology (Brest et al., 2009, see also Gates Foundation, 2008). All are quantifying expected return as (Gates Foundation, 2008):

Expected Return = ( Outcome or Benefit x Probability of Success ) / Cost

Differences relate to:- Estimation of outcomes or benefits (e.g. randomized control experiments, outputs

used as proxies for outcomes, timeframes, etc.)- Cost calculation (e.g. inclusion of overhead cost)- Attribution of results (e.g. probability of success, interdependencies, etc.)- Translation of outcomes or benefits into natural units or monetized (e.g. shadow

prices, discount rates, etc.)In the environmental domain applied valuing frameworks are more oriented to cost- benefit analysis, expanded with different type of (future) user values, leading to a Total Economic Value (TEV) concept (World Bank Environmental Department, 2005) including non-use or passive use values as identified by John Krutilla (1967). These values are the manifestation of people’s willingness to pay for a resource regardless of their ability to make any use of it now, or in the future. Such values may arise because of altruism towards future generations (bequest value) or because of the simple knowledge that something exists (existence value) even if individuals never plan to use it (figure 7).

8 SROI UK : http://www.sroi-uk.org/home-uk; SROI (Europe) http://www.sroi-europe.org/

24Figure 7. Total economic value of a tropical forest.Source: World Bank Environmental Department, 2005.

25

5 Some concluding remarksThis inventory paper is not intended to draw conclusions or provide guidelines for ventures or institutes on how to develop business initiatives and activities to improve human well-being and the environment on a profitable basis for people, planet and profit. It aims to give an overview of what is done in this area. Yet, by scanning the large quantity of information available, the authors obtained an impression of the difficulties that businesses might have in orienting themselves and defining a work plan for improving their people and planet impacts while securing their profits. This impression is shared in the following two paragraphs.

First of all, there is a tremendous quantity of information available, but it is scattered and difficult to synthesize in standardized rules. Especially physical data on environmental and social impacts are all over the planet, but synthesis and guidance on their use is lacking. While for example Dutch farmers are now able to calculate the nutrient balances through a number of rules of thumb (given legislative power), most producers in southern countries are not in such a position, lacking practical information on how to proceed. As a consequence of the lack of practical information, an enterprise, wanting to start improving its TBL impacts, would need to hire assistance from experts with expertise on terrains that are difficult to identify and involving cost without an idea on future benefits. Better availability of standardized rules of thumb and other practical information would give businesses the possibility to get an impression of impacts before hiring consultants.

Secondly, besides the scattered and complex information in the area, also legislation seems to be scattered and full of complex rules that are hard to digest, especially for small and medium enterprises in southern countries. While this is acknowledged by the legislative institutions themselves, clear efforts to simplify and adapt them to use by small and medium enterprises are scarce.

Thirdly, for obtaining certified labels, initial cost for certification and organization are high and projects need a long breath to become profitable.

In general, from the available information one gets the impression that improving TBL impacts for businesses can hardly be done through the businesses alone and often requires public money to be successful. Promoting the own capacity of businesses in this field would require simpler rules and legislation, but also practical guides with enough hands-on information enabling them to get a first impression on the environmental and social impacts of their activities and the possible gains through their improvements.

26

ReferencesAccountAbility (2011). AA1000 Stakeholder Engagement Standard 2011.UK Institute of Social and Ethical Accountability.http://www.accountability.org/images/content/3/6/362/AA1000SES%202010%20PRINT.PDF

ADB (undated). Strategic Environmental Assessment. http://www.adb.org/documents/ guidelines/environmental_assessment/Strategic_Environmental_Assessment.pdf

Arnoldus, M. and R. Bymolt (2011). Demystifying Carbon Markets. A Guide to Developing Carbon Credit Projects. KIT Publishers. ISBN 9789460221828.http://www.kitpublishers.nl/net/KIT_Publicaties_output/ShowFile2.aspx?e=1916

Australian Government (2011). National Carbon Accounting Toolbox (NCAT) CD. http://www.climatechange.gov.au/government/initiatives/ncat/ncat-toolbox-cd.aspx

P. Brest, H. Harvey, and K. Low (2009) Calculated Impact. Stanford Social Innovation Review. Leland Stanford Jr. University.http://www.hewlett.org/uploads/files/CalculatedImpact.pdf

Brown Jr, G. and W. Henry (1989). The economic value of elephants. Discussion paper 89–12. London, Environmental Economics Centre.

Carratti, P., H. Dalkmann and R. Jiliberto (2004). Analysing strategic environmental assessment: towards better decision-making. Ebook 978 1 84542 153 3.

CDC (2010). Toolkit on ESG for fund managers http://www.cdcgroup.com/uploads/finalcdctoolkitforfundmanagers20101.pdf

CERES (2010). The Ceres Roadmap for Sustainability.http://www.ceres.org/resources/reports/ceres-roadmap-to-sustainability-2010.pdf

Chapagain A.K., A.Y. Hoekstra, H.H.G. Savenije and R. Gautam (2005). The water footprint of cotton consumption. Value of Water Research Report Series No. 18. UNESCO-IHE-Delft. http://doc.utwente.nl/58372/1/Report18.pdf

Clawson, M. (1959). Methods of measuring demand for and the value ofoutdoor recreation. U.S. Resources for the Future. Reprint No. 10.

Clawson, M. and J.L. Knetsch (1976). The Economics of Outdoor Recreation.Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore.

Context (2006). Introduction to Social Return on Investment. Context international cooperation, Soesterberg.http://sroiseminar2009.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/70419-paper-sroi.pdf

Courant, P.N. and R.C. Porter (1981). Averting expenditures and the cost of pollution. J. of Environmental Economics and management 8 (4). 321-329. CREM (2000). Integral Biodiversity Impact Assessment System (IBIS). http://www.crem.nl/files/upload/documents/downloads/file/IBIS_Methodology_report_98_309.pdf

CSR Europe’s National Partner Network (2010). The updated Guide to CSR in Europe.http://www.csreurope.org/pages/en/a_guide_to_csr_in_europe_2010.html

Dalal-Clayton, B.D. and B. Sadler (2000). Strategic Environmental Assessment: A rapidly evolving approach. pp 14. ISBN 978-1-904035-33-6, ISSN 13579231.http://pubs.iied.org/pdfs/7790IIED.pdf

Dalal-Clayton B. and B. Sadler (2004). Strategic Environmental Assessment. A Sourcebook and Reference Guide to International Experience. IIED/Earthscan. ISBN 1-84407-179-0/1-84407-178-2. http://pubs.iied.org/pdfs/G02193.pdf

DEFRA (2011). Measuring and reporting greenhouse gas emissions. Including a Small Business User Guide: Guidance on how to measure and report your greenhouse gas emissions. http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/economy/business-efficiency/reporting/

27

Dharmaratne, G.S. and I. Strand (1999). Approach and methodology for natural resources and environmental valuation (mimeo). University of Maryland.

Drakenberg, O. et al. (2009). "Greening Development Planning: A Review of Country case Studies for Making the Economic Case for Improved Management of Environment and Natural Resources", OECD Environment Working Papers, No. 5, OECD publishing, © OECD.http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/1/23/42069446.pdf

EC (Undated). Introduction to Corporate Social Responsibility for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises. http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/sustainable-business/files/csr/campaign/documentation/download/introduction_en.pdf

EC (undated). A Guide to Communicating about Corporate Social Responsibility. http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/sustainable-business/files/csr-sme/communication_guide_en.pdf

EC (1997). Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997 amending Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment Official Journal L 073 , 14/03/1997 P. 0005 - 0015http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:1997:073:0005:0015:EN:PDF

EC (2001). Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2001 on the assessment of effects of certain plans and programmes on the environmenthttp://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2001:197:0030:0037:EN:PDF

EC (2009a). COM(2009)378. On the application and effectiveness of the EIA Directive.http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2009:0378:FIN:EN:PDF

EC (2011). Sustainable and responsible business. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). New European policy. http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/sustainable-business/corporate-social-responsibility/index_en.htm

EDFI (2009). Towards Sustainable Development. EDFI Principles for Responsible Financing. http://www.cofides.es/pdf/otros/EDFI%20Principles%20Responsible%20Financing.pdf

ENSEA (2011). Strategic Environmental Assessment. European Network for Strategic Environmental Assessment. http://ensea.weebly.com/sea.html

Environmental Justice Foundation (undated). Water and Cotton. www.ejfoundation.org/page334.html

EOI-LCA net (2011). http://www.eiolca.net/ See also Hendrickson, C. T., Horvath, A., et al. (1998). "Economic Input-Output Models for Environmental Life-Cycle Assessment." ACS Environmental Science and Technology 4:184A-191A.

EPA (2011). National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/index.html

Epstein (2008). Making Sustainability Work. Greenleaf Publishing Ltd ISBN 978-1-60509-382-6. http://www.greenleaf-publishing.com/productdetail.kmod?productid=2589

Equator Principles (2006). The equator principles. A financial industry benchmark for determining, assessing and managing social and environmental risk in project financinghttp://www.equator-principles.com/resources/equator_principles.pdf

EU (2009b). Memo/09/109, 16.03.2009. http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do? reference=MEMO/09/109&format=HTML&aged=1&language=EN&guiLanguage=fr

EU (2011a). Regulation No 691/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 2011 on European environmental economic accounts, Official Journal of the European Union L 192 Volume 54 22 July 2011.

EU (2011b). The European Union Ecolabelling Board http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ecolabel/about_ecolabel/who_does_what_en.htm#boardSee also the official site http://eco-label.org.uk/further_info/european_eco_label/eco_label_pdf/Eco%20Label%2066-2010.PDF

FAO and KIT (2005). Integrating environmental and economic accounting at the farm level. http://www.kit.nl/smartsite.shtml?id=SINGLEPUBLICATION&ItemID=1926

28

FAO and WHO (2011). Website on the Codex Alimentarius.http://www.codexalimentarius.net/web/index_en.jsp

Fischer, T.B. (2007). The theory and practice of strategic environmental assessment: towards a more systematic approach. Earthscan. ISBN 978-1-84407-452-5

FMO (2010). Equator Principles Reporting 2010. http://www.fmo.nl/FMO/documents/ESG/FMO%20Equator-Principles-Reporting-2010.pdf

Gates Foundation (2008). Measuring and/or Estimating Social Value Creation: Insights Into Eight Integrated Cost Approaches. http://www.gatesfoundation.org/learning/documents/wwl-report-measuring-estimating-social-value-creation.pdf

Global Footprint Network (2006). Ecological Footprint Standards. www.footprintstandards.org

Global Footprint Network (2011a). 2010 Annual Report.http://www.footprintnetwork.org/images/uploads/2010_Annual_Report.pdf

Global Footprint Network (2011b). Ecological Footprint and Human Development Index 1980-2007. http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/ GFN/page/fighting_poverty_our_human_development_initiative/

GRI (2011). Global Reporting Initiative. The G3 Indicator sets. www.globalreporting.org/resourcelibrary/G3.1-Guidelines-Incl-Technical-Protocol.pdf

Gustafson, C. (2011). Lifecycle analysis emerging as agriculture energy standard. Western Farm Press. March. http://westernfarmpress.com/management/lifecycle-analysis-emerging-agriculture-energy-standard

Gyrd-Hansen, D. (2004). Investigating the social value of health changes. Journal of Health Economics. Volume 23, Issue 6, November 2004, Pages 1101-1116.

Hunkeler, D and G. Rebitzer (2005). The Future of Life Cycle Assessment. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, Volume 10, Number 5, 305-308, DOI: 10.1065/lca2005.09.001 http://www.springerlink.com/content/qn19541131640274/

Hunkeler, D., K. Lichtenvort and G. Rebitzer eds. (2008). Environmental Life Cycle Costing,SETAC publication. New York, Taylor & Francis Group in collaboration with the Society ofEnvironmental Toxicology and Chemistry.

Hunkeler, David Ed. (2004). Life-cycle Management. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC). ISBN-10: 1880611775 | ISBN-13: 978-1880611777

ICC (2008). ICC guide to responsible sourcing. Integrating social and environmental considerations into the supply chain. International Chamber of Commerce. Commission on Business in Society.http://www.iccwbo.org/uploadedFiles/ICC/policy/business_in_society/Statements/ResponsibleSourcing%20Brochure%20final.pdf

ICLEI (2007). Cities for Climate Protection Milestone Guide. http://www.concordma.gov/pages/ConcordMA_CSE/ICLEI_CCP_Milestone%20Guide.pdf

ICLEI Canada (2010). Changing Climate, Changing Communities. Guide and Workbook for Municipal Climate Adaptation. http://www.iclei.org/index.php?id=11710 and http://www.iclei.org/ fileadmin/user_upload/documents/Canada/Changing_Climate/ICLE076_-_NRCan_Guide.pdf

ICLEI Europ (2007a). The Procura+ Manual. A guide to cost-effective sustainable public procurement, 2nd Edition. Sustainable procurement Campaign. http://www.iclei.org/ fileadmin/user_upload/documents/Global/Progams/Procurement/Procura__Manual_complete.pdf

ICLEI Europe (2007b). RESPIRO Guide on Socially Responsible Procurement of Textiles and Clothing. http://www.respiro-project.eu/fileadmin/template/projects/respiro/files/RESPIRO_Guides/RESPIRO-Textiles-final-www.pdf

ICLEI Europe (2011). Driving energy efficient innovation through procurement. A practical guide for public authorities. http://www.smart-spp.eu/fileadmin/template/ projects/smart_spp/files/Guidance/Final_versions/SMART_SPP_Guide_2011_EN_FINAL_www.pdf

29

ICLEI USA (Undated_a). Five Milestones for Climate Mitigation (with link to the full five milestones guide). http://www.icleiusa.org/action-center/getting-started/iclei2019s-five-milestones-for-climate-protection

ICLEI USA (Undated_b). Five Milestones for Sustainabilityhttp://www.icleiusa.org/sustainability/five-milestones-for-sustainability/

ICLEI USA (2010). The Process Behind PlaNYC. How the City of New York Developed Its Comprehensive Long-Term Sustainability Plan. ICLEI–Local Governments for Sustainability USA and City of New York. http://nytelecom.vo.llnwd.net/o15/agencies/planyc2030/pdf/iclei_planyc_case_study_201004.pdf

IFC (2006-2007). Performance standards and Guidance Noteshttp://www.ifc.org/ifcext/sustainability.nsf/Content/PerformanceStandards

IFC (2007). Stakeholder Engagement: A Good Practice Handbook for Companies Doing Business in Emerging Markets. http://www.ifc.org/ifcext/enviro.nsf/attachmentsbytitle/p_stakeholderengagement_full/$file/ifc_stakeholderengagement.pdf

IFC (2009-2010). Environmental and Social Review Procedures and manual:http://www.ifc.org/ifcext/sustainability.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/pol_ESRP2009/$FILE/ESRP2009.pdfhttp://www.ifc.org/ifcext/sustainability.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/pol_ESRP_Manual/$FILE/ESRP_Manual.pdf

IFC (2012). Updated set of Performance standards and Guidance Noteshttp://www.ifc.org/ifcext/policyreview.nsf/Content/2012-Edition#PerformanceStandards

IISD (2007). Corporate Social Responsibility. An Implementation Guide for Business.http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2007/csr_guide.pdf

IISD (2008). Seeking Sustainability COSA Preliminary Analysis of Sustainability Initiatives in the Coffee Sector.

ILO (2006). Implementing the Global Employment Agenda: Employment strategies in support of decent work. “Vision” document. Geneva, ISBN 92-2-118841-8 http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_emp/documents/publication/wcms_103335.pdf

ILO (2007). The Decent Work Agenda in Africa: 2007–2015 Eleventh African Regional Meeting Addis Ababa, April 2007.http://www.ilo.org/public/english/standards/relm/rgmeet/11afrm/dg-thematic.pdf

ILO (2008). Decent Work Country Programmes, A Guidebook, Version 2. Geneva, International Labour Office (ISBN 978-92-2-120956-0/7). http://www.ilo.org/public/english/bureau/program/dwcp/download/guidev2.pdf

ILO (2011a). Website on Labour Standardshttp://www.ilo.org/global/standards/lang--en/index.htm

ILO (2011b). Website on Social Dialog.http://www.ilo.org/global/about-the-ilo/decent-work-agenda/social-dialogue/lang--en/index.htm

ILO (2011c). Website on The Social Protection Floor Initiativehttp://www.ilo.org/public/english/protection/spfag/index.htm

ILO (2011d). Ergonomic Checkpoints in Agriculture. ISBN 978-92-2-125448-5http://www.ilo.org/global/publications/books/forthcoming-publications/WCMS_168042/lang--en/index.htmILO (2011e). Safety and Health in Agriculture. Code of practice. ISBN 978-92-2-124970-2http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---dgreports/---dcomm/---publ/documents/publication/wcms_159457.pdf

ILO (2011f). Regulating for Decent Work. New directions in labour market regulation. ISBN 978-92-2-124559-9. http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---dgreports/---dcomm/---publ/documents/publication/wcms_159154.pdf

India Environment Portal (1992). Experts favour hiking charges to halt irrigation water waste. http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/node/13238

Indian Government (undated) WATER Technologies for Better Quality of Life

30

http://www.dae.gov.in/publ/betrlife/water/water.pdf

Industry Canada (2011). Corporate Social Responsibility: An Implementation Guide for Canadian Business. http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/csr-rse.nsf/eng/rs00126.html

ISEAL (2010). ISEAL Codes of Good Practice. http://www.isealalliance.org/code

ISO (2004). ISO 14000 essentials. http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_14000_essentials

ISO (2006a). ISO 14040, Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Principles and framework. http://www.iso.org/iso/pressrelease.htm?refid=Ref1019

ISO (2006b). ISO14044, Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Requirements and guidelines. http://www.iso.org/iso/pressrelease.htm?refid=Ref1019

ISO (2010). ISO 26000: Guidance on social responsibility.http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail?csnumber=42546 Jensen, A. and A. Remmen (2005). Life cycle management – A bridge to more sustainable products. UNEP in collaboration with the Society for the Environmental Sustainability (SETAC). Paris.

Jia Yang, Ming Xu, Xuezhi Zhang, Qiang Hu, M. Sommerfeld, Yongsheng Chen (2011). In press. Life-cycle analysis on biodiesel production from microalgae: Water footprintand nutrients balance. Bioresource Technology.http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mingxu/files/papers/Algae.pdf

Jones, C.E., M. Baker, J. Carter, S. Jay, M. Short and C. Wood (2005). Strategic environmental assessment and land use planning: an international evaluation. Earthscan. ISBN 1844071103

Karoly Lynn A. (2008). Valuing Benefits in Benefit-Cost Studies of Social Programs.‖ RAND.

Krutilla, J.V. (1967). “Conservation Reconsidered.” American Economic Review 57 (1967). 777–86.

MIGA (2007). Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency’s Performance Standards on Social & Environmental Sustainability. http://www.miga.org/documents/performance_standards_social_and_env_sustainability.pdf

Mitchell, R.C. and R.T. Carson (1989). Using surveys to value public goods. The contingent valuation method. Resources for the Future, Washington D.C. ISBN 0-915-707-32-2.http://www.econ.ucsd.edu/~rcarson/papers/UsingSurveysToValuePublicGoods.pdf

Munasinghe, M. and E. Lutz (1993). Environmental economics and valuation in development decision making, In: Munasinghe, M. (ed.). Environmental economics and natural resource management in developing countries. Committee of International Development Institutions on the Environment, Washington DC, World Bank.

OECD (2006). Applying Strategic Environmental Assessment. Good Practice Guidance for Development Co-operation. DAC Guidelines and Reference Serieshttp://browse.oecdbookshop.org/oecd/pdfs/free/4306141e.pdf

OECD (2008a). Natural Resources and Pro-Poor Growth. DAC Guidelines and Reference Series. The Economics and Politics. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/61/43/42440224.pdf

OECD (2008b). Strategic Environmental Assessment and adaptation to climate changehttp://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/0/43/42025733.pdfPaull, J. (2009). The Value of Eco-Labelling: Price Premiums & Consumer Valuations of Organic, Natural, and Place of Origin Food Labels Saarbrücken, Germany: VDM VerlagISBN 978-3-639-15495-5 196 pages. http://orgprints.org/16980/1/16980.pdf

Rosário Partidário, M.do and R. Clark (2000). Perspectives on strategic environmental assessment. Lewis Publishers. ISBN 1-56670-360-3.

31

Sadler B. and R. Verheem (1996). Strategic Environmental Assessment: Status, Challenges and Future Directions. Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, The Netherlands, and the International Study of Effectiveness of Environmental Assessment.

SAI (2008). International Standard Social Accountability 8000.http://www.sa-intl.org/_data/n_0001/resources/live/2008StdEnglishFinal.pdf(Based on ILO and UN human rights conventions. Set up by Social Accountability International -SAI- which has been established together with the Council on Economic Priorities, CEP to define and verify implementation of ethical workplaces).

Scholten, P., J. Nicholls, S. Olsen, B. Galimidi (2006). Social Return on Investment: A Guide to SROI Analysis. Lenthe Publishers.

Scottish Environment Link (2008). Carbon Accounting Guidance compiled for LINK by Jolin Warren. http://www.scotlink.org/files/publication/other/LINKGuidetoCarbonAccount08.pdf

Smith, K., G. Lawrence and C. Richards (2010). "Supermarkets’ governance of the agri-food supply chain: is the ‘corporate-environmental’ food regime evident in Australia". International Journal of Society of Agriculture and Food 17 (2). 140–161.

SSWM (2011). Guide to Corporate Social Responsibility. Sustainable Sanitation and Water Management. http://www.sswm.info/sites/ default/files/reference_attachments/CHANDLER%202004%20Guide%20to%20CSR.pdf

Sustainable Enterprise (2008). Sustainable consumerism: what Does it mean for New Zealand exporters? http://www.sustainableenterprise.org/SCreport_Print_2.pdf

The Green Standard (2011). The 2011 Forum on Using LCAs & EPDs.

The Times (Undated). Business Case studies. http://businesscasestudies.co.uk/amway/corporate-social-responsibility/introduction.html

Therivel, R., E. Wilson, S. Thompson, D. Heany and D. Pritchard (1992). StrategicEnvironmental Assessment, London: Earthscan.

Thérivel, R. and M. do Rosário Partidário (1996). The practice of strategic environmental assessment. pp 206. Earthscan. ISBN 978-1853833731

Therivel, R. (2004). Strategic environmental assessment in action. Earthscan.ISBN 1-84407-042-5

Tobias, D. and R. Mendelsohn (1991). Valuing eco-tourism in a tropical rain forest reserve. Ambio 20 (2).

UK Business Link (2011). Corporate social responsibility. http://online.businesslink.gov.uk/ bdotg/action/printguide?r.l1=1074404796&r.l2=1074446322&r.l3=1075408468&topicId=1075408468

UN CEB (2007). Toolkit for Mainstreaming Employment and Decent Work. United Nations System Chief Executives Board for Coordination (CEB). http://www.ilo.org/public/libdoc/ilo/2007/107B09_93_engl.pdf

UN, EC, IMF, OECD and World Bank (2003). Integrated Environmental and Economic Accounting : Handbook of National Accounting. http://unstats.un.org/unsd/envaccounting/seea2003.pdf

UNCTAD /ISAR (2006). Guidance on good practices in corporate governance disclosure.http://www.unctad.org/en/docs/iteteb20063_en.pdf

UNEP (undated). Eco-labelling – A potential marketing tool for African Products.

UNEP (2005a). Life Cycle Management - A bridge to more sustainable products LCM. Slide Show April 2005

UNEP (2005b). The Stakeholder Engagement manual – Volume 1: The guide to practitioners’ perspectives on stakeholder engagement, Paris.http://www.unep.fr/shared/publications/pdf/WEBx0114xPA-StakeholderEngagement1.pdf

32

UNEP (2005c). The Stakeholder Engagement manual – Volume 2: The guide to practitioners’ perspectives on stakeholder engagement, Paris.

UNEP (2006a). Background Report for a UNEP guide to Life Cycle Management- A bridge to sustainable products. Paris

UNEP (2006b). Design for Sustainability – A global guide, Parishttp://www.d4s-de.org/manual/d4stotalmanual.pdf, +http://www.d4s-de.org/manual/d4sfurtherreading.pdf

UNEP (2006c). UNEP 9th High-Level Seminar on Sustainable Consumption and Production (SCP9). – Background Paper.10-12 December 2006, Arusha, Tanzania.http://www.scp-centre.org/fileadmin/content/files/project/DevThroughTheMarket/scp9_bckgrdpaper_final_cscp.pdf

UNEP (2006d). The Trade and Environmental Effects of Ecolabels: Assessment and Response. http://www.unep.ch/etb/publications/Ecolabelpap141005f.pdf

UNEP (2007). Life Cycle management – A business guide to sustainability, Paris.

UNEP (2008). Life Cycle Assessment - A product-oriented method for sustainability analysis. Training manual. Paris

UNEP (2009a). Guidelines for Social Life Cycle Assessment of Products. Paris

UNEP (2009b). Towards Triple Impact – Toolbox for analysing sustainable ventures in developing countries, Paris.

WBCSD (2011). Guide to Corporate Ecosystem Valuationhttp://www.wbcsd.org/work-program/ecosystems/cev.aspx

Weinstein M. (2009). Measuring success: How Robin Hood estimates the impact of grants. http://www.robinhood.org/media/169437/2009_metrics_paper.pdf

Whitford (2008). Partners for Climate Protection Program for the Town of Bouctouche (Canada). Information for Milestones #1 – 3.http://fcm.ca/Documents/reports/PCP/Energy_Management_and_Conservation_Project_Town_of_Bouctouche_EN.pdf

World Bank (2005a). Strategic Environmental Assessment. Concept and Practice. By Kulsum Ahmed, Jean Roger Mercier, and Rob Verheem. Environment Strategy Notes No 14, June 2005. http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/ENVIRONMENT/0,,contentMDK:20687523~pagePK:210058~piPK:210062~theSitePK:244381,00.html

World Bank (2005b). Cost Recovery and Water Pricing for Irrigation and Drainage Projects.Agriculture and Rural Development Discussion Paper 26.http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTARD/Resources/Cost_Recovery_final.pdf

World Bank Environmental Department (2005). Estimating the costs of environmental degradation. A Training Manual.http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTEEI/214574-1153316226850/20781069/EnvironmentalDegradationManual.pdfWorld Commission on the Social Dimension of Globalization (2004). A Fair Globalization Creating opportunities for all. http://www.ilo.org/public/english/wcsdg/docs/report.pdf

WRI and WBCSD (2011). Greenhouse Gas Protocol Product Life Cycle Accounting and Reporting Standard. World Resources Institute GHG Protocol Team. http://pdf.wri.org/ghgp_product_life_cycle_standard.pdf

WSGA (2005). Energy Life Cycle Cost Analysis (ELCCA). Update 2011. Washington State General Administration. http://www.ga.wa.gov/eas/elcca/home.html

Zadek, S., S. Lingayah and M. Forstater (1998). Social Labels: Tools for Ethical Trade Final report prepared for the European Commission. http://plippo.com/eco/eco_pdf/social_labels.pdf

33

Annex 1 Domains for assessing social and environmental performance as indicated by various sources

The Ceres Roadmap for Sustainability (CERES, 2010). indicates, besides sectors on Governance, Stakeholder Engagement and Disclosure, five domains for assessing performance:

1. Operations- Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Energy Efficiency- Facilities and Buildings- Water Management- Eliminate Waste- Human Rights

2. Supply Chain- Policies and Codes- Align Sourcing Practices- Engaging Suppliers- Measurement and Disclosure

3. Transportation and Logistics- Transportation Management- Transportation Modes- Business Travel and Commuting

4. Products and Services- Business Model Innovation- Research & Development and Capital Investment- Design for Sustainability- Marketing Practices- Strategic Collaboration

5. Employees- Recruitment and Retention- Training and Support- Promoting Sustainable Lifestyles

The Global Reporting Initiative (GRI, 2011). developed the G3 indicator protocol sets for enterprises to report on:

- Indicator Protocols Set Economic (IP/EC)- Indicator Protocols Set Environment (IP/EN)- Indicator Protocols Set Labor Practices and Decent Work (IP/LA)- Indicator Protocols Set Human Rights (IP/HR)- Indicator Protocols Set Society (IP/SO)- Indicator Protocols Set Product Responsibility (IP/PR)

Technical Protocol: Applying the Report Content Principles

The IFC sustainability framework (IFC, 2006-2007). contains standards and guidance notes on:

1. Social and Environmental Assessment and Management Systems2. Labor and Working Conditions3. Pollution Prevention and Abatement4. Community Health, Safety and Security5. Land Acquisition and Involuntary Resettlement6. Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Natural Resource Management7. Indigenous Peoples8. Cultural Heritage

The Handbook of National Integrated Environmental and Economic Accounting (UN, EC, IMF, OECD and World Bank, 2003) uses the following resource accounts:

- Mineral and energy resources/accounts- Water resources/accounts- Biological resources/accounts (forests, wooded land and forest products)- Aquatic resources/accounts (fish). - Land resources/accounts- Ecosystem resources/accounts

34

Annex 2 Overview of valuation techniques for environmental and social impacts9

Market-based methods

Market-based methods use market prices for valuation. These methods are relatively simple and easy in application. Calculations can be done using one of five methods:1. In the replacement/repair cost method, the costs to be actually incurred to replace or

repair damaged productive assets are estimated. It is assumed that damaged assets should be replaced as a means of conserving or restoring the quality of environmental or social services to its former condition for future generations.

2. The changes in productivity method assesses the difference in the value of production before change and after change of environmental or social resources and thus provides a measure of the loss of value due to an environmental or social change. The application of the method involves a two-step procedure viz. the quantification of the actual changes in resources as the first step followed by the estimation of the value of the resulting change in production as the second step.

3. The loss of human capital approach resembles the approach followed in the change in productivity method, except that it is applied to human capital rather than natural capital. The method is based on the principle that the environmental or social change, especially health aspects and pollution, will increase morbidity and mortality and thereby affect the quality and quantity of human capital. This loss of human capital is reflected in the loss of productivity resulting from loss of work days and in extreme cases, premature death. Therefore, the total loss would be the value of lost production plus the cost of treatment.

4. The preventive expenditure approach assesses money that individuals may spend on appropriate preventive measures to mitigate adverse environmental or social effects. The method envisages that it becomes necessary to incur expenses to replace or simulate a natural or social function which was provided earlier by the environment or the society, but presently unavailable because of environmental degradation or social change.

5. The shadow projects approach takes the replacement cost approach one step further. The method estimates the complete cost of replacing a range of environmental or social goods and services. In cases where it is difficult to value individual items in a system or when most services and functions are unknown, this method has better applicability. The theoretical cost of a project that will replicate or provide close substitutes is estimated through this method.

Non-market-based methods

Some goods and services are not traded in the market. Consumers do not pay a market price to gain access to them. Nonetheless, individuals benefit from their use and loss of access to these non-market goods may cause significant welfare losses to individuals. A variety of methods have been developed to measure these non-market values (Dharmaratne & Strand 1999): 1. The contingent valuation method (CVM, Mitchell & Carson, 1989) asks individuals in

some form or another on the maximum amount that they would be willing to pay to avoid the loss of a public convenience. The contingent valuation technique constructs a realistic but hypothetical market that exists as it is described by the interviewer, and participants respond to a change in environmental or social qualities by stating their maximum willingness to pay to avoid the change. Contingent valuation studies are conducted as face-to-face interviews, telephone interviews or mail surveys.

2. In travel cost models individuals are asked on both money and time (which they clearly value)are they expend to access a recreational site or to visit a doctor. These act as surrogates for the price of the goods or services. The travel cost approach (developed by Clawson 1959 and Clawson & Knetsch 1966) has been extensively used in developed countries to value recreational goods and services (Dixon et al., 1992). The method has been applied in Costa Rica (Tobias & Mendelsohn 1991) to measure the value of eco-tourism at a tropical rainforest site and in Kenya (Brown and Henry 1989) to estimate the demand function for safaris (in Munasinghe & Lutz 1993, p. 42).

3. Random utility models (RUMs) are similar in concept to the travel cost models and adopt the same sorts of values and principles. These models focus e.g. on the tourists’ choice among the discrete alternative recreational sites instead of focusing on the number of trips a tourist takes to a given site. This type of model is particularly

9 Based on FAO-KIT (2005) and The World Bank Environmental Department (2005).

35

appropriate when there are many options available to the individual. They have also been used to assess the social value of health changes (Gyrd-Hansen 2004).

4. Hedonic methods evaluate consumers’ willingness to pay for superior social and environmental quality (Epstein, 2008). The technique applies information derived from surrogate markets for private goods, traded in a competitive market (most frequently the real estate or labour market), which may bear some relationship to a public environmental or social good. Hedonic pricing has been used to estimate the impact of environmental deterioration by examining the decline in real estate value.

5. Averting behaviour models, by assessing the minimum expenditure necessary to avoid an environmental or social nuisance, give a justifiable lower-bound estimate of the economic loss (compensating variation) from environmental degradation or social damages (e.g. Courant and Porter, 1981). If individuals wear masks to avoid air pollution and this is sufficient for its avoidance, then a lower bound on the individual’s willingness to pay for improved air quality would be the expenditures associated with wearing masks.

Different methods are preferred for valuing various environmental effects like degradation, pollution, water depletion or loss of biodiversity (see scheme below).Pollution Impacts

Air pollutionHealth impacts

Infrastructure damagesAmenity impacts

Medical costHuman capital methodAverting behaviorHedonic wagesContingent valuationCost of replacementHedonic prices

Water pollution

Health impacts

Loss of ecosystems

Medical costHuman capitalAverting behaviorContingent valuationChange in productivityCost of replacementHedonic pricesContingent valuation

Soil degradationAgricultural losses

Increase in vulnerability to disasters

Change in productivityCost of replacementAverting behaviorHuman capitalAverting behaviorHedonic prices

Noise pollution DiscomfortHealth impacts

Hedonic pricesAverting behavior

Natural resources Impacts

Forest and protected areas Loss of green areas (deforestation)

Change in productivityCost of replacementHedonic pricesTravel costContingent valuation

Coastal ecosystems

Loss of ecosystems (coral reef eutrofication, mangrovesdestruction, beach erosion)

Change in productivityHedonic pricesTravel costContingent valuation

Water resources Water resource depletionChange in productivityCost of replacementHedonic pricesContingent valuation

Biodiversity Biodiversity lossHedonic pricesTravel costContingent valuation

36

Annex 3 Resources with tools and data analysis for addressing climate change in Strategic Environmental Assessments10

Canadian International Development Agency SEA Support toolAims to assist a program manager or analyst in identifying the environmental linkages to a potential policy, plan or program that might otherwise go unnoticed. It takes the form of a checklist and considers, amongst other things, linkages to climate change vulnerability, adaptation, capacity building, sequestration, and appropriate technology.Copies available by emailing Peter_Croal@acdi-cida.gc.ca

IPCC ReportsAssessment reports that provide a comprehensive and objective synthesis of the latest scientific, technical and socio-economic findings relevant to the understanding of the risk of climate change globally. The website includes also IPCC special reports, methodology reports, technical papers and supporting material.http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/index.htm

IUCN-Gender and EnvironmentResources such as fact sheets, case studies, manuals, etc., on gender equity and equality in environment and conservation initiatives. http://www.genderandenvironment.org

Knowledge Network on Vulnerability and Adaptation to Climate Change Resource CenterNational Communications Support Programmes’s (NCSP) library of literature, guidance documents, software packages and data sources for undertaking the various tasks involved in assessing climate change impacts, vulnerability and adaptation for the preparation of national communications by Non-annex I Parties to the UNFCCC.http://ncsp.va-network.org/section/resources

ORCHIDSystematic climate risk management methodology which assesses the relevance of climate change and disaster risks to an organization’s portfolio of development project.http://www.ids.ac.uk/index.cfm?objectId=1A1A5005-AC68-2058-03415B11AED09B47

UNDP Adaptation Learning MechanismA project aimed at capturing and disseminating adaptation experiences and good practices via an open knowledge platform. http://www.undp.org/climatechange/adapt/alm.html

UNFCCC National CommunicationsReports on the steps taken by the UNFCCC Parties to implement the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Included in these reports are national climate change vulnerability and adaptation assessments.http://unfccc.int/national_reports/non-annex_i_natcom/items/2979.php

UNFCCC National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPAs)NAPAs identify Least Developed Countries’ (LDC) priority activities to respond to their urgent and immediate needs with regard to adaptation to climate change. The NAPAs are action-oriented, country-driven, flexible and based on national circumstances. The preparation of NAPAs was funded through the Least Developed Countries Fund (LDCF). and implementation of identified LDC priorities is now underway based on priority project profiles, also through the LDCF.http://unfccc.int/adaptation/napas/items/2679.php

UKCIP Adaptation WizardOpen-source web-based tool designed to help the user to understand climate change and to integrate climate change into decision-making. It contains four steps consisting of impacts information, quantification of risks, decision support and planning, and an adaptation strategy review.http://www.ukcip.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=147&Itemid=273

10 From OECD (2008). Strategic Environmental Assessment and adaptation to climate change http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/0/43/42025733.pdf

37

WE-ADAPTAn interactive space where users and experts share knowledge and experience on climate adaptation. Web space contains core themes on Framing Adaptation, Risk Monitoring, Decision Screening, and Communication, as well as tools and methods, worked examples and useful guidance to aid adaptation planning and implementation.

Women’s Environment and Development Organization (WEDO). Resources and information on the intersection of gender equality and climate change. http://www.wedo.org

Other sources to support guide integration of climate change in SEA:

Australian Government (2006). Climate Change Impacts and Risk Management: a Guide for Business and Government.http://www.greenhouse.gov.au/impacts/publications/pubs/risk-management.pdf

Levett-Therivel Sustainability Consultants (2007). Strategic Environmental Assessment and Climate Change: Guidance for Practitioners.http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/commondata/acrobat/seaccjune07_1797458.pdf

Lim B., et al. (2004). Adaptation Policy Frameworks for Climate Change. Developing Strategies, Policies and Measureshttp://www.undp.org/gef/05/kmanagement/pub_practitioner.html

McGray H., et al. (2007). Weathering the Storm: Options for Framing Adaptation and Development, http://pdf.wri.org/weathering_the_storm.pdf

United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). (2007). Resource Manual to Support Application of the UNECE Protocol on Strategic Environmental Assessment. Final Draft. Links to extra resources: Climate Change.http://www.unece.org/env/eia/sea_manual/links_climate_change.html

United States Agency for International Development (2007). Adapting to Climate Variability and Change: A Guidance Manual for Development Planning.http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/environment/climate/docs/reports/cc_vamanual.pdf

United Kingdom Climate Impacts Programme (UKCIP). (2003). Climate Adaptation: Risk, Uncertainty and Decision Makinghttp://unfccc.int/files/adaptation/methodologies_for/vulnerability_and_adaptation/application/pdf/united_kingdom_climate_impacts_programme__ukcip_.pdf.

United Nations Development Programme (2007). Technical Paper: Framework to Apply the Strategic Environmental Assessment Approach to Adaptation, Final Draft, May 5, 2007. http://www.seataskteam.net/index.cfm?module=Library&page=Document&DocumentID=6532

World Bank, World Bank ADAPT tool: A computer-based tool (Assessment and Design for Adaptation to Climate Change: a Prototype Tool for screening proposed development projects for potential risks posed by climate change and variability. The tool is meant for use by development practitioners, including bank staff, bilateral agencies, NGOs and client governments. http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/ENVIRONMENT/EXTCC/0,,contentMDK:21315054~menuPK:3725076~pagePK:210058~piPK:210062~theSitePK:407864,00.html

38