Transversal Practices: Evaluation Of The Impacts

Research & Development activities aiming at introducing or obtaining environmentally friendly products or packaging (P17) have a positive impact on the environmental and social dimensions, while it can be positive, neutral, or negative on the economic dimension (cf.

Figure 57). As pointed out by LF2: “When a product is designed ex-ante and sustainability criteria are taken into account, the economic aspect is positive in the sense that it is very easy to sell it at the correct price on the market. Conversely, when a product is modified according to sustainable principles, this can involve for example the change in one or more suppliers and the economic impact is probably negative”.

4

7 6

3

1

4 4 4

ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SOCIAL

P16: CORPORATE GREEN IMAGE MANAGEMENT

Positive Neutral Negative NA

125

Figure 57 – P17: impact assessment results.

Sustainable practices specifically addressing the commitment of a company towards sustainable development are Corporate Social Responsibility Programs (P18) and Green Human Resource Management (P19). At a first glance appear that while P18 is widely implemented, P19

has not the same result. This consideration is in line with the results obtained from the empirical analysis carried out. P19 is not adopted by SF1, SF2, and MF2. By looking at the results obtained for P18 the impacts are positive on the environmental and social dimensions, while on the economic dimension impact can be negative. As underlined by LF2 the impact can be negative in the short run and turning into positive in the long run or, as pointed out by LF1 the impact on the economic dimension can vary according to the initiative that is proposed. Other than donations, which appear to be a common activity among the respondents’ other projects implemented by companies are for example “granting to the employees working hours dedicated to voluntary work, financed by the company (LF1)”, “For our employees, we have created a kind of “small village”. These are independent houses dedicated to our employees and their families. In addition, we have set up a school bus service for children who have to go to school from the farm. We try to be very careful by considering the workers' working day, which starts very early, so having the house close to the farm can help them, beyond the economic benefits. And this is also a small contribution to reduce gas emissions. We don't have a written code of conduct, but it's more of a code of ethics that is transferred to the farm from generation to generation (SF2)”. P19 takes the form of individual or teams training activities, or it is implemented through the establishment of an environmental and social committee that ensures that all operations comply with the company's vision and mission.

3

5 5

1 1

6 6 6

ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SOCIAL

P17: GREEN PRODUCT INNOVATION AND DESIGN

Positive Neutral Negative NA

126

Figure 58 – P18 and P19: impact assessment results.

From the results of the empirical analysis carried out, Standard and Certifications (P20) practice appears to be widely adopted as a demonstration that processes are performed or that products are compliant with their requirements. The same is evident by looking at the results obtained from the face-to-face interview (cf. Figure 59). The impacts of the implementation of P20 are positive on the environmental and social dimensions, while on the economic dimension the impact can be negative. The experiences collected from small, medium and large underline the fact that certifications require tests that are costly, but in the long term the economic impact can also be positive. In the specific, as pointed out by SF2: “From an economic point of view, the impact can be positive or negative. Negative because certifications require an initial investment, but if you succeed in conveying the value of your products and the market accepts to pay a bit more as a guarantee of the whole series of values, it can become a positive aspect.

From an environmental and social point of view, the impact is certainly positive, both in terms of the image of your company and from the consumer protection perspective”.

Figure 59 – P20: impact assessment results.

4

10 11

2

1 5

ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SOCIAL

P18: CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY PROGRAMS

Positive Neutral Negative NA

2

7 7

4

1 1

2

3 3 3

ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SOCIAL

P19: GREEN HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

Positive Neutral Negative NA

7

11 11

4

ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SOCIAL

P20: ADOPTION OF STANDARD AND CERTIFICATIONS

Positive Neutral Negative NA

127

Figure 60 depicts the impacts deriving from the implementation of collaborative practices. As already underlined in the discussion of the empirical analysis carried out, P21 is widely implemented while other collaborative practices specifically dealing with sustainability concerns show a lower degree of implementation. P22 is not adopted by SF1, SF3, MF1, and MF3. P23 is not adopted by SF1, SF2, MF1, MF3, and LF1. P24 is not adopted by SF2, MF1, and MF3. Therefore, sustainable collaborative practices appear to be more difficult to implement for small and medium-sized companies. Nevertheless, considering the size of the sample interviewed, this cannot be considered as a general conclusion.

Involving upstream and downstream partners to share planning information (P21) show positive or neutral impacts on the economic and environmental dimensions, while considering the social dimension, the impact assessment results vary among the respondents. SC1 points out that “At the social level, the implementation of P21 could raise some problems because in our operations we are very conditioned by events, so planning the production can damage our company”.

Considering the environmental dimension, MF1 and LF1 emphasize production planning as a good practice to avoid wastages of raw materials. Moreover, SF1 and SF2 underline that P21 is mostly carried out in collaboration with clients rather than suppliers. However, they point out two different perspectives by assessing the impacts: “there is an increasing requirement of a just-in-time production performance that could reach chaotic levels (demands from today for tomorrow) raising problems (SF1)”, “We produce exclusively according to the needs of our clients, both for fresh and frozen products. From the economic dimension, this has an important impact because it means being able to work in just-in-time, thus reducing warehouse stocks to the minimum, which would otherwise have a high cost. From a social dimension, being able to plan production based on the clients’ needs certainly has a positive impact because it means giving customers a product that is always fresh (SF2)”. Involving upstream and downstream partners to share green targets (P22) has a positive impact on the environmental and social dimensions. Concerning the economic dimension, the impact is recognized to be positive in the long run. Finally, the establishment of strategic alliances to achieve mutually relevant benefits through the exchange, sharing, and co-development of resources and capabilities with partners (P23) and the implementation of sustainable practices with other actors involved in the SC such as collaborative waste reduction, sharing of environmental innovations and technologies, and joint development of recyclable products (P24) show a positive impact on the three sustainability dimensions.

128

Figure 60 – P21-P24: impact assessment results.

Furthermore, as already underlined, collaboration within a supply chain is recognized as one of the most important practices to achieve sustainability. Plenty of practices are found in the scientific literature. In the study carried out the attention is limited to P20 – P24. To complete this analysis, respondents are asked if there are other sustainable collaborative practices they implement. LF3 underline the importance of the collaboration activities carried out with certification bodies while MC1 point out the need to integrate the transport systems in collaboration with other companies, in turn improving the Green Shipping and Distribution (P14) practice, as already discussed in the previous paragraph (cf. Paragraph 11.2.3).

Adoption of Information and Communication Technologies (P25) is recognized in literature to reduce costs, increase productivity, lower the consumption of resources, food losses, and waste.

Accordingly, the impact results assessment shows that the implementation of this practice can have a positive or neutral impact on the three TBL dimensions (cf. Figure 61). P25 is not adopted by MF2.

9 8 8

2 3

2 1

ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SOCIAL P21: COLLABORATIVE SUPPLY CHAIN: INFORMATION PLANNING

Positive Neutral Negative NA

4

7 7

1 2

4 4 4

ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SOCIAL P22: COLLABORATIVE SUPPLY CHAIN: GREEN TARGETS PLANNING

Positive Neutral Negative NA

6 5 6

1

5 5 5

ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SOCIAL P23: STRATEGIC SUPPLY CHAIN

COLLABORATION Positive Neutral Negative NA

7 8

7

1 1

3 3 3

ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SOCIAL P24: SUPPLY CHAIN INTEGRATION

SYSTEM

Positive Neutral Negative NA

129

Figure 61 – P25: impact assessment results.