University of Vaasa - Vaasan yliopisto

iodiversity (IPES, 2008). The IPES research would benefit from including the
supply chain in assessing impacts on ecosystem services and biodiversity.
664
F&C Asset Management suggest that suppliers themselves need to be more proactive,
and realise that by failing to take some initiative they may lose competitive
advantage and business opportunities (Barrington, 2008). However, the potential for
associated market gains could also present a barrier in terms of instigating
biodiversity partnerships and information exchange with suppliers, from buyers
afraid of losing market differentiation. Conversely, competitive advantage could be
strengthened by linking a chain of suppliers with the focal company and the product,
for example, in publicising the reduction in cumulative impacts.
A case study on Center Parcs (UK), in the leisure industry, found that first and
second tier suppliers already work within a partnership culture on general
environmental issues, such as, waste, recycling, and logistics (Whatling, 2009).
Suppliers are also encouraged to extend this culture to their own suppliers. The
reductions on cost and contribution to sustainable development are proving to be of
mutual benefit to all players. Center Parcs are keen to extend this to include
biodiversity aspects of their outsourcing operations.
The home improvement company B&Q use a life cycle environmental approach to
their products. The company operates a partnership programme with its suppliers and
as part of the organisation’s vendor assessment programme (QUEST) it operates
Critical Failure Points (CFP), which must be met as a condition of supply. The B&Q
environmental CFP does not mention biodiversity in their CR report and the focus is
on compliance. B&Q is part of the Kingfisher Group who demand active engagement
with suppliers and set environmental improvement targets for suppliers, focusing on
timber and chemical products (KF, 2008).
These systems are not seen as a ‘bullying’ tactic by focal companies on their
suppliers, but as a mutually beneficial part of doing business consistent with other
management frameworks concerning health and safety, equal opportunities, working
conditions and fair trade.
The process of contributing to halting biodiversity loss within supply chains could
form the basis of profitable new business models. These include the supply of
commodities and services according to emerging standards of biodiversity-friendly
production, supported by independent certification or assurance mechanisms, as well
as the supply of ecosystem restoration and management services to both public and
private customers. Reciprocal business benefits potentially include inter alia
securing the supply of sustainable goods and services, end-user appeal and increased
product marketability, financial gain via tax incentives, reputational gain, attracting
and retaining the best employees.