A systems perspective to supply chain development

In classic economic theory, making products cheaper by reducing the cost of goods (COGS) can mean removing the intermediaries in the supply chain where margin might be absorbed. This means system actors, such as agents, middlemen/women, traders, small retailers (kiosks) are vulnerable to the disintermediation. However, in low-income countries, this has a system wide effect: this will limit the supply of goods and services to marginalized populations, such as smallholder farmers or the urban poor and this will reduce employment and revenue generation by cutting the poor out of the system. Moreover, in times of desperation, this will naturally create conflict and instability that will have even more far-reaching effects beyond the original supply chain.

Things to remember:

• For real wide-scale change, take a step back and think more systemically and less narrowly and think about the wider impact of any intervention in business operations, pricing and COGS. 
• Rather than a focus on cost, price and money, consider gains that bring about long-term growth, such as quality, value and service-driven loyalty
• Yes, eliminating supply chain actors may reduce the cost of goods along the way, but there is no guarantee that this will be passed on to the customer.  
• Intermediaries are the backbone of a system and agents, traders, kiosks are ever present in a market - work through them rather than against them or by sidelining them
• Look at where the incentives lie. For a supplier, that wants to shed certain costs, who might be willing to take them on? Who might benefit? Who might see the value in managing this transaction directly? This is essentially the origination of outsourcing.
• Consider how the market could function better. As a supplier, you may be incurring a huge cost getting products to the consumer. However, if a retailer can offer a better coordination function, then it would make more sense to switch to wholesale operations. Many retailers in developing countries do this albeit with  need for capacity building around effective management. 

The many faces of CSR - some concerns

CSR is ...

... a collection of small piecemeal fixes that cost millions whilst companies stand in the way of wider systemic reforms (The Atlantic)

... a response to and/or a driver of ineffective regulation and enforcement mechanisms (aka corruption) (NBER Working Paper)

... the antithesis of sustainable? doing as much (or as little) as the legal compliance frameworks deem necessary, social (green)washing, a disregard for systems change and an appropriation of cheap labour and culture... (Triple Pundit)

... old, redundant and anemic, desperately seeking new energy to bring about real change both within the organisations, which espouse it as well within the markets, economies and systems in which they operate? (New Global Citizen)

... missing an opportunity to respond to new consumer-driven preferences and evolving buying behaviour?

• Tetra Pak research found that 60 per cent of consumers that they surveyed said that they would look for environmental information on products they buy and would be influenced by what they read
• In a survey by Mintel, 60 per cent of respondents said that guaranteeing that ingredients used in its products are responsibly sourced was of major importance (Supplymanagement.com)
• Several brands, such as Fairtrade, pay producers a higher wage than other buyer. They demonstrate the market for niche consumer groups that have a willingness and ability to pay a significant premium for higher quality product 
• Labour Behind the Label also makes the point that paying producers a living wage for basic products, such as t-shirts, may mean increasing the retail price by only 3%, which is something that might be barely noticed by a customer

...
http://www.supplymanagement.com/news/2015/responsible-sourcing-a-key-concern-for-majority-of-uk-consumers