IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/znwudp/12.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Discussion paper on an organizational and management perspective towards business model of traceability and sustainable chemicals in the leather supply chains

Author

Listed:
  • Jöst, Ann-Cathrin

Abstract

The production of leather goods requires different chemicals. To align with sustainable consumption and production standards, these chemicals should have no negative effects on the environment and people who are producing and consuming these products. The proliferation of more sustainable chemicals across the leather industry is partially driven by novel mandatory regulations like EU REACH, and partially by the emergence of new voluntary industry standards. At the same time, there are barriers, which can keep companies from becoming more sustainable such as the orientation towards more short-term goals or limitations of the industries' existing infrastructures. Another barrier is a lack of data on current chemical use, which is needed to identify where and how chemicals must be exchanged. While extending efforts to enable traceability can generate this data, a change towards more sustainable chemicals must be supported through a business case to succeed. Without a business case, companies involved will not put in the required additional effort. This paper illustrates that such a business case is difficult to create because of challenges emanating from the complexity of global leather supply chains and its regulatory environment. To understand what bottlenecks exist, this paper made use of a qualitative approach and interviewed 10 different actors in the leather supply chain. Through an interview series, it could be identified that an interest in full chemical traceability and the uptake of more sustainable chemicals exists. However, to realize this uptake there should be harmonized standards and tools on sustainability reporting. In addition, more traceability and changes in chemicals might more likely apply if supply chain partnerships are based on long-term relationships, in which financial support for changes and reporting efforts or the longevity of a business case can sustain. Simultaneously, more discussions and communication should take place between all actors in the supply chain. That is because most changes seem to be demanded by brands, which tend to give little say to other actors and their needs i.e., hide, leather and chemical producers.

Suggested Citation

  • Jöst, Ann-Cathrin, 2023. "Discussion paper on an organizational and management perspective towards business model of traceability and sustainable chemicals in the leather supply chains," ZNWU Discussion Papers 12, Darmstadt University of Applied Sciences, Darmstadt Business School, Center for Sustainable Economic and Corporate Policy (SECP).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:znwudp:12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/271066/1/1843713039.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chiara Mio & Silvia Panfilo & Benedetta Blundo, 2020. "Sustainable development goals and the strategic role of business: A systematic literature review," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(8), pages 3220-3245, December.
    2. Jeremy Bulow, 1986. "An Economic Theory of Planned Obsolescence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(4), pages 729-749.
    3. Mehmood Khan & Matloub Hussain & Avraam Papastathopoulos & Ioannis Manikas, 2018. "Trust, information sharing and uncertainty: An empirical investigation into their impact on sustainability in service supply chains in the United Arab Emirates," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(6), pages 870-878, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. John Boyce & Jeffrey Robert Church & Lucia Vojtassak, "undated". "Capacity Constraints in Durable Goods Monopoly: Coase and Hotelling," Working Papers 2012-07, Department of Economics, University of Calgary, revised 08 Aug 2012.
    2. Galiani, Sebastian & Jaitman, Laura & Weinschelbaum, Federico, 2020. "Crime and durable goods," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 146-163.
    3. Pangburn, Michael S. & Stavrulaki, Euthemia, 2014. "Take back costs and product durability," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 238(1), pages 175-184.
    4. Edward Kutsoati & Jan Zabojnik, 2001. "Durable Goods Monopoly, Learning-by-doing and "Sleeping Patents"," Discussion Papers Series, Department of Economics, Tufts University 0105, Department of Economics, Tufts University.
    5. Stefan Ambec & Corinne Langinier & Stéphane Lemarié, 2008. "Incentives to Reduce Crop Trait Durability," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(2), pages 379-391.
    6. Changying Li & Jianhu Zhang, 2013. "Dynamic Games of R&D Competition in a Differentiated Duopoly," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 169(4), pages 660-679, December.
    7. Pasquale Schiraldi, 2006. "Second-Hand Markets and Collusion by Manufacturers of Semidurable Goods," Boston University - Department of Economics - Working Papers Series WP2006-028, Boston University - Department of Economics.
    8. Xin Huang & Xianling Jiang & Wei Liu & Qian Chen, 2021. "Business Group-Affiliation and Corporate Social Responsibility: Evidence from Listed Companies in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-21, February.
    9. Marco Runkel, 2004. "Optimal Emissions Taxation under Imperfect Competition in a Durable Good Industry," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(2), pages 115-132, April.
    10. Cabolis, Christos & Clerides, Sofronis & Ioannou, Ioannis & Senft, Daniel, 2007. "A textbook example of international price discrimination," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 95(1), pages 91-95, April.
    11. Tantawy Moussa & Amir Allam & Mahmoud Elmarzouky, 2022. "Global modern slavery and sustainable development goals: Does institutional environment quality matter?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(5), pages 2230-2244, July.
    12. Oliver Gürtler, 2009. "On pricing and protection of complementary products," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 3(3), pages 209-223, November.
    13. Ibrahim Mutambik & Abdullah Almuqrin, 2024. "The Best of Both Worlds: How Financial Growth Can Engender Improved Sustainability for Businesses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-23, June.
    14. Simone Lazzini & Zeila Occhipinti & Angela Parenti & Roberto Verona, 2021. "Disentangling economic crisis effects from environmental regulation effects: Implications for sustainable development," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(5), pages 2332-2353, July.
    15. Chia-Chi Lu & Weifeng Hung & Jyh-Jian Sheu & Pai-Ta Shih, 2011. "Investment with network externality under uncertainty," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 36(4), pages 555-564, May.
    16. Gregory E. Goering, 2011. "Gun Buybacks and Firm Behavior: Do Buyback Programs Really Reduce the Number of Guns?," Review of Economics & Finance, Better Advances Press, Canada, vol. 1, pages 31-42, February.
    17. Lopez, Belen & Rangel, Celia & Fernández, Manuel, 2022. "The impact of corporate social responsibility strategy on the management and governance axis for sustainable growth," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 690-698.
    18. Rubing Li & Arun Sundararajan, 2024. "The Rise of Recommerce: Ownership and Sustainability with Overlapping Generations," Papers 2405.09023, arXiv.org.
    19. Michael Waldman, 2004. "Antitrust Perspectives for Durable-Goods Markets," CESifo Working Paper Series 1306, CESifo.
    20. Bruce W Hamilton & Molly Macauley, 1996. "Competition and Car Longevity," Economics Working Paper Archive 361, The Johns Hopkins University,Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Leather industry; supply chain; chemicals; sustainability; traceability;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:znwudp:12. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/znwdade.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.