Sustainability certification schemes: evaluating their effectiveness and adaptability

• Published date: 06 June 2016
• Date: 06 June 2016
• Pages: 579-592
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-03-2016-0066
• Author: Renzo Mori Junior,Daniel M. Franks,Saleem H. Ali
• Subject Matter: Strategy,Corporate governance

Sustainability certification schemes:

evaluating their effectiveness and

adaptability

Renzo Mori Junior, Daniel M. Franks and Saleem H. Ali

Renzo Mori Junior is a

Postdoctoral Research

Fellow at the Centre for

Social Responsibility in

Mining, Sustainable

Minerals Institute, The

University of Queensland,

Brisbane, Australia.

Daniel M. Franks is a

Senior Research Fellow

at the Centre for Social

Responsibility in Mining,

Sustainable Minerals

Institute, The University of

Queensland, Brisbane,

Australia. Saleem H. Ali is

Chair in Sustainable

Resource Development at

the Centre for Social

Responsibility in Mining,

Sustainable Minerals

Institute, The University of

Queensland, Brisbane,

Australia.

Abstract

Purpose –New sustainability certification schemes (SCS) with different scope, governance structure

and operating practice are fast emerging. This rapid growth and divergence in metrics has resulted in

questions about the effectiveness of such schemes. Although this practice has been growing fast, to

date, there are no reviews comprehensively synthesising the literature regarding SCS’ main flaws,

challenges and improvement opportunities. This paper aims to identify what are the key components

affecting effectiveness of SCS, highlighting their benefits, flaws and improvement opportunities.

Design/methodology/approach –An integrated literature review was conducted to identify and

assess recent studies related to the benefits, flaws, effectiveness and improvement opportunities of

SCS worldwide.

Findings –Key components affecting the effectiveness of SCS were identified (sustainability

awareness; market access; management systems and productivity; social, environmental and

economic impacts; monitoring outcomes; competition, overlapping and interoperability; stakeholder

participation; and accountability and transparency). The authors argue that SCS to succeed have to be

effective; provide accountability about their goals and achievements; and manage stakeholders’

expectations. Civil Society’s awareness of the scientific underpinnings of sustainability issues also

contributes to the existence and improvement of such schemes.

Research limitations/implications –The limitations of this study are associated with the secondary

material that was publicly available for our literature review.

Originality/value –This paper fulfils an identified need to explore the key components affecting

effectiveness of SCS, their benefits, flaws and improvement opportunities. Such a synthesis also

identifies the key areas where interoperability between SCS should be pursued by corporations and

governments.

Keywords Accountability, Sustainability, Standards, Corporate social responsibility, Effectiveness,

Certification schemes

Paper type Literature review

1. Introduction

Sustainability certification schemes[1] (SCS) for a wide range of commodities and products

are a relatively new practice that has emerged and grown fast in recent years (Reinecke

et al., 2012;Blackman and Rivera, 2011;Young et al., 2010;Derkx and Glasbergen, 2014;

Manning et al., 2012). SCS are mostly voluntary and new certification schemes with

different scope, governance structure and operating practice are fast emerging. For

example, comparing various voluntary SCS WWF (2013) concluded that environmental and

social performance varies greatly among schemes and in high-risk countries (countries

where risk factors such as land grabbing and weak governmental performance are found)

there is a rapid growth of weak certification schemes. This fast growth allied with the

differences among different SCS has resulted in questions about the effectiveness of those

schemes and to what extent those schemes are delivering important economic, social and

environmental outcomes. The existence of weak and ineffective SCS can undermine the

credibility of the practice and their existence in the long term.

Received 16 February 2016

Revised 29 February 2016

2 March 2016

Accepted 30 March 2016

The authors acknowledge the

support of the Tiffany & Co.

Foundation and are grateful

for comments from anonymous

reviewers.

DOI 10.1108/CG-03-2016-0066 VOL. 16 NO. 3 2016, pp. 579-592, © Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 1472-0701 CORPORATE GOVERNANCE PAGE 579