Advertisement

Responsible sourcing of metals: certification approaches for conflict minerals and conflict-free metals

  • Steven B. Young
ADVANCING SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC KNOWLEDGE IN LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT

Abstract

Purpose

Responsible sourcing of metals is characterized as an approach for life cycle management (LCM) and sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) of social issues. The focus is on the supply of “conflict minerals”—tin, tantalum, tungsten, and gold (3TG)—whose mining and trade are implicated in conflict and severe social conditions in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). Downstream manufacturers are using compliance strategies to reach multiple tiers and long distances into product chains to buy conflict-free sources of these metals from mines, smelters, and refineries.

Methods

The research uses qualitative methods and public documents to compare 16 conflict mineral programs. A theoretical framework in three dimensions guided the enquiry into program governance, program standards, and certification processes. Additional empirical analysis of the conflict-free sourcing program, the largest and most central industry-led effort on conflict minerals, was supported by confidential access to audit reports, company policies, and management procedures on more than 140 metallurgical facilities.

Results and discussion

In fewer than 4 years, conflict-free sourcing programs have impacted global 3TG metal supply chains, as indicated by pricing and significant producer compliance. Electronics, jewelry, and other manufacturers—many influenced by US conflict mineral regulation—are “pulling” metals markets for conflict-free sourcing. Private standard programs focus on product chain chokepoints to support efficient engagement: a limited number of 3TG facilities that are influenced to implement “responsibility management systems,” practice conflict-free sourcing, and undergo compliance audits. Some supply chains operate as closed pipelines along the full product chain from mine to end-product. Tantalum has been most successful as about 95 % of producers are compliant; however, for gold, in particular, the scale of compliance is challenged.

Conclusions

Downstream manufacturing industries are “governing at a distance” the management practices of upstream raw material producers. For LCM, responsible sourcing may be applicable to product chains with other metals and commodities. For SSCM, conflict-free sourcing indicates how compliance and supplier development strategies can penetrate multiple tiers into supply chains to address social issues in developing countries. Future research is needed on understanding more on supplier companies and their motivations and on sustainability performance outcomes for the conflict mineral problem.

Keywords

Auditing Certification Conflict minerals Governance Metals Mining Raw materials Responsible sourcing Social aspects Standards Sustainable supply chain management 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The author acknowledges the cooperation and support of the Electronic Industry Citizenship Coalition, Global e-Sustainability Initiative, and the Conflict-Free Sourcing Initiative and is grateful for comments from Liz Muller and three anonymous reviewers.

Conflict of interest

The author is a member of the Audit Review Committee of the Conflict-Free Smelter Program.

References

  1. Abbott KW, Snidal D (2009) Strengthening international regulation through transnational new governance : overcoming the orchestration deficit. Vanderbilt J Transnat Law 42:501–578Google Scholar
  2. Alliance for Responsible Mining. (2014) Fairmined gold. Retrieved June 26, 2013, from http://www.communitymining.org/en/1-fairmined-gold
  3. Aluminium Stewardship Initiative (2014) The ASI standard. Retrieved from http://aluminium-stewardship.org/
  4. Auld G, Gulbrandsen LH, McDermott CL (2008) Certification schemes and the impacts on forests and forestry. Ann Rev Environ Res 33(1):187–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Balkau F, Sonnemann G (2010) Managing sustainability performance through the value-chain. Corp Gov 10(1):46–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Benn S, Giurco D, Brown PJ, Agarwal R (2014) Towards responsible steel: preliminary insights. Resources 3(1):275–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. BGR (2014) CTC Certification Scheme. Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe. Retrieved from http://www.bgr.bund.de/EN/Themen/Min_rohstoffe/CTC/Approach/Certification-Scheme/certification-scheme_node_en.html
  8. Bleischwitz R, Dittrich M, Pierdicca C (2012) Coltan from Central Africa, international trade and implications for any certification. Res Policy 37(1):19–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bryman A, Bell E, Mills A, Yue A (2011) Business research methods (Canadian edition). Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  10. Busch L (2011) Standards: recipes for reality. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  11. Carlsson C, Johansson H (2013) Private standards: leveling the playing field for global competition in the food supply chain? LundGoogle Scholar
  12. Cashore B (2002) Legitimacy and the privatization of environmental governance: how non-state market-driven (NSMD) governance systems gain rule-making authority. Governance 15(4):503–529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Conroy ME (2007) Branded!: how the “certification revolution” is transforming global corporations. New Society Publishers, Gabriola IslandGoogle Scholar
  14. DMCC (2014) Responsible sourcing of precious metals. Dubai Multi-Commodites Centre. Retrieved from http://www.dmcc.ae/gold-responsible-sourcing-precious-metals
  15. EICC & GeSI (2012) Conflict-Free Smelter (CFS) Program Supply Chain Transparency Smelter Audit Protocol for Tin, Tantalum and Tungsten. Electronic Industry Citizenship Coalition & Global e-Sustainability Initiative. Retrieved from http://www.conflictfreesourcing.org/
  16. EICC & GeSI (2014a) The Conflict-Free Sourcing Initiative. Retrieved from http://www.conflictfreesourcing.org/
  17. EICC & GeSI (2014b) Conflict Minerals Reporting Template. Retrieved from http://www.conflictfreesourcing.org/
  18. Enough Project (2012) From congress to Congo: turning the tide on conflict minerals, closing loopholes, and empowering minersGoogle Scholar
  19. Enough Project (2014a) Electronics firms urged to boycott “blood minerals” from DR Congo—human rights tribune. Retrieved from http://www.enoughproject.org/news/electronics-firms-urged-boycott-blood-minerals-dr-congo-human-rights-tribune
  20. Enough Project (2014b) The crisis. Retrieved from http://www.raisehopeforcongo.org/content/crisis
  21. Fleury A-M, Davies B (2012) Sustainable supply chains—minerals and sustainable development, going beyond the mine. Res Policy 37(2):175–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. FLO-CERT (2014) FLO-CERT. Retrieved from http://www.flo-cert.net/flo-cert/
  23. Franken G, Vasters J, Dorner U, Melcher F, Sitnikova M, Goldmann S (2012) Certified trading chains in mineral production: a way to improve responsibility in mining. In: Sinding-Larsen R, Wellmer F-W (eds) Non-renewable resource issues: geoscientific and societal challenges. Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-90-481-8679-2_11, pp 213–227
  24. Gemechu ED, Helbig C, Sonnemann G, Thorenz A, Tuma A (2014) Import-based indicator for the geopolitical supply risk of raw materials in life cycle sustainability assessments. J Ind Ecol. doi: 10.1111/jiec.12279 Google Scholar
  25. Gemechu ED, Sonnemann G, Young SB (2015) Geopolitical-related supply risk assessment as a complement to environmental impact assessment: the case of electric vehicles. Int J Life Cycle Assess. doi: 10.1007/s11367-015-0917-4 Google Scholar
  26. GHGm (2008) Social and environmental responsibility in metals supply to the electronic industry. Guelph, Ont.: Electronic Industry Citizenship Coalition (EICC) and Global e-sustainability Initiative (GeSI). Retrieved from http://www.gesi.org/files/20080620_ghgm_ser_metalstoelectronics.pdf
  27. Glaser BG, Straus AI (1967) The discovery of grounded theory. Aldine, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  28. Glass J, Achour N, Parry T, Nicholson I (2011) The role of responsible sourcing in creating a sustainable construction supply-chain. In: Management and innovation for a sustainable built environment. AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  29. Global Witness (2014) Conflict minerals. Retrieved from http://www.globalwitness.org/campaigns/conflict/conflict-minerals
  30. Haufler V (2010) The Kimberley process certification scheme: an innovation in global governance and conflict prevention. J Bus Ethics 89(S4):403–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hayes K, Burge R (2003) Coltan mining in the Democratic Republic of Congo: how tantalum-using industries can commit to the reconstruction of the DRC. Fauna & Flora InternationalGoogle Scholar
  32. Hilson G (2008) “Fair trade gold”: antecedents, prospects and challenges. Geoforum 39(1):386–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Initiative for Responsible Mining Assurance (2014) The process towards the IRMA Responsible Mining Assurance System. Retrieved from http://www.responsiblemining.net/the-irma-process/
  34. ISO (2011) ISO 19011—guidelines for auditing management systems. International Organisation for Standardisation, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  35. ITRI (2013a) Congo miners seek to resume tin exports from North Kivu. Retrieved from https://www.itri.co.uk/index.php?option=com_zoo&task=item&item_id=2830&Itemid=177
  36. ITRI (2013b) Conflict-free minerals contributing to community development in Maniema. Retrieved from https://www.itri.co.uk/index.php?option=com_zoo&task=item&item_id=2906&category_id=1&Itemid=177
  37. ITRI (2014) iTSCi Project Overview. Retrieved from https://www.itri.co.uk/index.php?option=com_zoo&view=item&Itemid=189
  38. KEMET (2014) KEMET guarantees 100% conflict-free tantalum for all customers. Retrieved from http://www.kemet.com/conflictfree
  39. Klassen RD, Vereecke A (2012) Social issues in supply chains: capabilities link responsibility, risk (opportunity), and performance. Int J Prod Econ 140(1):103–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Koning R de, & Enough Project (2013) Striking gold: how M23 and its allies are Infiltrating Congo’s Gold Trade. Washington, DC: Enough ProjectGoogle Scholar
  41. LBMA (2013) Responsible gold guidance (version 5 Jan. 18, 2013). The London Bullion Market AssociationGoogle Scholar
  42. Levin E, Villegas C, Weinberg R, Bueti C, Campilongo E, Smiciklas J, Kuehr R (2012) Greening ICT supply chains—survey on conflict minerals due diligence initiatives. International Telecommunication Union (ITU), GenevaGoogle Scholar
  43. Linton J, Klassen R, Jayaraman V (2007) Sustainable supply chains: an introduction. J Oper Manag 25(6):1075–1082CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Loconto A, Busch L (2010) Standards, techno-economic networks, and playing fields: performing the global market economy. Rev Int Polit Econ 17(3):507–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Maignan I, Hillebrand B, McAlister D (2002) Managing socially—responsible buying: how to integrate non-economic criteria into the purchasing process. Eur Manag J20(6):641–648CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Manhart A, Schleicher T (2013) Conflict minerals—an evaluation of the Dodd-Frank Act and other resource-related measures, vol 49. Oko-Instut, FrieburgGoogle Scholar
  47. MMSD Project, & International Institute for Environment and Development (2002) Breaking new ground. Earthscan Publications, LondonGoogle Scholar
  48. Nilsson-Lindén H, Baumann H, Rosén M, Diedrich A (2014) Organizing life cycle management in practice: challenges of a multinational manufacturing corporation. Int J Life Cycle Assess. doi: 10.1007/s11367-014-0818-y Google Scholar
  49. OECD (2011) OECD due diligence guidance for responsible supply chains of minerals from conflict-affected and high-risk areas. OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/9789264111110-en
  50. Partnership Africa Canada (2014) Conflict-free artisanal gold. Retrieved from http://www.pacweb.org/en/conflict-free-gold
  51. Prendergast J, Lezhnev S (2009) From mine to mobile phone: the conflict minerals supply chain. Global Witness, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  52. Remmen A, Jensen AA, Frydendal J (2007) Life cycle management: a business guide to sustainability. United Nations Environment Programme, ParisGoogle Scholar
  53. Resolve (2010) Tracing a path forward: a study of the challenges of the supply chain for target metals used in electronics. Resolve, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  54. Resolve (2014a) Conflict-free tin initiative. Retrieved from http://solutions-network.org/site-cfti/
  55. Resolve (2014b) “Solutions for hope” project offers solutions and brings hope to the people of the DRC. Retrieved from http://solutions-network.org/site-solutionsforhope/
  56. Responsible Jewellery Council (2014) Chain-of-custody certification. Retrieved from http://www.responsiblejewellery.com/chain-of-custody-certification/
  57. RSPO (2014) Milestones. Roundtable on sustainable palm oil. Retrieved from http://www.rspo.org/en/milestonesGoogle Scholar
  58. Sarin R (2006) No dirty gold: consumer education and action for mining reform. J Clean Prod 14(3-4):305–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Schneider L, Berger M, Finkbeiner M (2011) The anthropogenic stock extended abiotic depletion potential (AADP) as a new parameterisation to model the depletion of abiotic resources. Int J Life Cycle Assess 16(9):929–936CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. SCS (2014) Certified responsible source: precious metals, gemstones and jewelry. Scientific Certification Systems. Retrieved from http://www.scsglobalservices.com/certified-responsible-sourceGoogle Scholar
  61. Seuring S, Muller M (2008) From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management. J Clean Prod 16(15):1699–1710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Signet Jewelers (2013) Signet Responsible Sourcing Protocol (“SRSP”) for conflict -free gold (Revised September 2013). Signet JewelersGoogle Scholar
  63. Sparks P (2013) Tantalum association T.I.C. suspends King Tan, gains GAM. Metal-Pages. York. Retrieved from http://metal-pages.com/l/2-tantalum-association-tic-suspends-king-tan-gains-gam
  64. Steel Stewardship Forum (2014) Responsible steel. Retrieved from http://steelstewardship.com/projects/responsible-steel/
  65. Steering Committee of the State-of-Knowledge Assessment of Standards and Certification (2012) Toward sustainability: the roles and limitations of certification. Resolve, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  66. TI-CMC (2014) Tungsten Industry-Conflict Minerals Council. Retrieved from http://www.ti-cmc.org/
  67. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (2010) Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, Pub. L. No. 1376Google Scholar
  68. United Nations Security Council (2004) Letter dated 9 July 2004 from the Coordinator of the Group of Experts on the Democratic Republic of the Congo addressed to the Chairman of the Security Council Committee established pursuant to resolution 1533 (2004) Retrieved from http://www.poa-iss.org/CASAUpload/ELibrary/S-2004-551.pdf
  69. Vogel D (2008) Private global business regulation. Ann Rev Polit Sci 11(1):261–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. WGC (2012) Conflict-free gold standard: an introduction. World Gold Council, LondonGoogle Scholar
  71. World Gold Council (2014) Conflict-free gold standard. Retrieved from http://www.gold.org/about_gold/sustainability/conflict_free_standard/
  72. Yawar SA, Seuring S (2015) Management of social issues in supply chains: a literature review exploring social issues, actions and performance outcomes. J Bus Ethics. doi: 10.1007/s10551-015-2719-9 Google Scholar
  73. Young SB, Dias G (2011) LCM of metals supply to electronics: tracking and tracing “conflict minerals.” LCM 2011—towards life cycle sustainability management. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.1875976
  74. Young SB, Dias G (2012) Conflict-free minerals supply-chain to electronics. In Electronics Goes Green 2012+ (EGG) (Vol. 2011, pp. 1–5). Berlin: IEEE Xplore. Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=6360416&isnumber=6360408
  75. Young SB, Fonseca A, Dias G (2010) Principles for responsible metals supply to electronics. Soc Resp J6(1):126–142Google Scholar
  76. Young SB, Zhe Y, Dias G (2014) Prospects for sustainability certification of metals. Met Res Tech 111:131–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Environment, Enterprise and Development (SEED)University of WaterlooWaterlooCanada

Personalised recommendations