Opaque supply chains allow bad actors to operate freely and without accountability, leaving potential for any number of social or environmental harms to be carried out. This lack of understanding may previously have been tolerated, but a clear shift has more recently taken place in the mind of the consumer – indifference to the history of a product is no longer acceptable. Individuals are no longer impressed by the knowledge that nothing demonstrably bad has occurred in the manufacture of the goods that they buy, and are instead placing value on the knowledge that the impacts of their consumption have been mitigated by a responsible production process.

Greater supply chain transparency can be achieved in a number of ways, but it is important to understand in general terms that material information can almost always be provided at little to no cost by any actor in a supply chain. This information is not regularly given without request today, as it is not typically rewarded in the market, though other sharing hesitancies could occur; it is reasonable for a factory to anticipate that they could be unnecessarily criticised by revealing too much to their downstream partners, or there could instead be a more fundamental fear surrounding their organisation being cut from the chain.

Establishing the expectation for product details to be shared can in turn be tricky, though avenues of opportunity do exist. If the volume of trade between two businesses is high, then this can be leveraged to the benefit of the purchaser. If the buyer cannot use purchasing power to their advantage, then other incentives (such as preferred supplier status) could be employed.

In a world where ESG issues are at the forefront of consumer minds, it is now more than ever that difficult questions will be asked of industry, which will in turn echo down the supply chain.

Anonymity is no longer an acceptable argument for a lack of transparency, as the risk to the brand – and the world – is too great. It is our job as industry to facilitate transparency, to ensure that origins are known and risks mitigated. Tackling these problems supports our shared ESG responsibilities and builds consumer confidence, enabling our brands to grow.

TRG’s COP26 monitoring group response:

We have 100 countries signing up, and some of these signatories have substantial forest areas, which is a great start, but Climate Change is happening here and now and we need to act immediately if we are going to see a positive effect in time. Global forests absorb one third of annual CO2 emissions, but on average 28 million hectares of forest are cut down every year. There are some big questions that we need to ask the signatories such as the following:

• There is a commitment to stop deforestation in 8 years time, but what are the practical steps and measures that are going to be employed as we countdown to 2030?

• Most of the countries with the largest forests host the poorest people. How can we fairly and equitably incentivise local populations to protect and manage their forests in a sustainable way? Particularly where use of the forest region is shared with large corporations.

• How will signatories practically demonstrate their commitment to this declaration? What will be the physical proof? Will they permit and acknowledge the outcome of regular independent forest monitoring and reporting?

• What will be the sanctions caused by state failure to adhere to the declaration and who will impose them? Will it only be by embarrassment? Most of the individuals that have signed will have moved on in 8 years and be unembarrassable.

What drives deforestation is money, what will stop deforestation is investment. Through informed purchasing decisions, we as consumers of forest products or of products grown on deforested land, should support visibility of the upstream supply chain to enable good forest management to happen.

It is we as individuals and as participants in global industry who have the ability and responsibility to enact this 2030 commitment through transparency and investment, to ensure that the products we buy and supply do not cost us the Earth.