Despite claims by the Dutch Agreement on Sustainable Garments and Textiles (AGT) that its member companies are “well on the way to meeting sustainability targets,” two worker rights groups say the initiative is making too little progress on its goal of supply chain transparency.
The five-year agreement (Convenant Duurzame Kleding en Textiel or CKT) was signed in 2016, but an analysis of its second annual report has prompted the Dutch Clean Clothes Campaign (SKC) and the Research Foundation for Multinational Enterprises (SOMO) to conclude there has been no positive impact for workers in production countries such as Bangladesh, China, India, Pakistan and Turkey.
Go deeper with GlobalData
Discover B2B Marketing That Performs
Combine business intelligence and editorial excellence to reach engaged professionals across 36 leading media platforms.
They also say that while the annual report states 78% of the companies assessed are “on track” and 8% “fully satisfied,” it is not clear how the AGT has reached these figures.
“The secretariat assesses the action plans of participating companies on the basis of an assessment framework; however, this framework has serious shortcomings,” SOMO says.
“First, it is unclear how a company can achieve the maximum number of points. Secondly, most of the sub-questions are poorly or unclearly formulated. For example, 74 points can be obtained under the heading ‘Result indicators.’ However, this is about formulating objectives and actions, not evidence of carrying out actions or bringing about measurable improvements in terms of labour rights, animal welfare or the environment.
“According to the agreement in the covenant, companies must achieve a 20% score in the first year (of their participation), a 40% score in the second year, and a 60% score in the third year. The tables in the annual report do not make it possible to determine exactly whether these objectives have been achieved because all companies – signatories from the first hour and companies that have recently joined – are lumped together.”
US Tariffs are shifting - will you react or anticipate?
Don’t let policy changes catch you off guard. Stay proactive with real-time data and expert analysis.
By GlobalDataAmong achievements listed by the AGT earlier this week are that 86% of participating brands “are well on the way to meeting the AGT targets.”
It adds: “By gaining a clearer picture of conditions at a larger number of production sites and of the materials used by companies, and by analysing their own supply chain, companies took specific action in 2018 to change their operational management in a way that makes them better able to tackle abuses in their supply chain.”
It also hailed one of the key successes during 2018 being an expansion of the list of production sites that supply companies affiliated with the AGT, from 2,802 sites at the end of 2017 to 4,268 at the end of 2018.
But SOMO laments: “Unfortunately, this is an aggregated list, so AGT companies cannot be directly linked to the factories where their products are made.”
“The aggregated production location list makes it impossible to see which brand produces in which factory,” says Pauline Overeem, senior researcher at SOMO. “As a result, employees of a factory or the organisations that represent them cannot know which brand to turn to to address problems. This must always be done through the AGT secretariat. This is the indirect and slow route. So far from ideal.”
“Real speed is now needed to actually improve the working conditions in the factories on the AGT list,” agrees SKC’s Suzan Cornelissen.
Writing in the AGT annual report, chair Pierre Hupperts, acknowledged that “change is slower than we would wish it to be in view of our enthusiasm and commitment.”
He added: ” It takes time to arrive at the right approach and to change the organisation and processes within companies. This makes it essential to set clearly defined priorities and to focus our attention and efforts on activities that can really make a difference.
“The Dutch textile market is only a small part of the world market and our influence is limited. However, our initiative can help to get things moving within the international garment and textile sector.”
