Embracing our Shared Responsibility: GPSNR’s newest Working Group

Share This Post

Before the second General Assembly on 23 September 2020, the GPSNR Executive Committee had approved the creation of a Shared Responsibility Working Group that would be tasked to define the principles of shared responsibility for GPSNR.

The term ‘shared responsibility’ is relatively new to the sustainability scene, and as such, there is currently no commonly accepted definition for it. In general, shared responsibility is a value-driven concept which recognizes that supply chains are structurally imbalanced in terms of value and benefit, risk, burden of compliance, climate change impacts, power of negotiation, and access to information and resources. A shared responsibility approach strives for value, benefits, risks and improvement investments to be equitably distributed across all actors within the supply chain.​

In order to establish the foundational work that would enable the creation of the Shared Responsibility Working Group, the Executive Committee formed a Task Force comprising several of its members. Over a series of weekly calls, the Task Force has developed a Terms of Reference (ToR) and a set of Guiding Principles to inform the work of the new Shared Responsibility Working Group.

It is envisioned that the Shared Responsibility Working Group will draw from the Guiding Principles for Shared Responsibility (currently being developed by the Executive Committee’s Shared Responsibility Task Force), as well as the GPSNR Equity Definition and the studies launched by the Equity Working Group, to develop an implementation framework for the platform with respect to shared responsibility.

More To Explore

News

Secretariat Update – January 2020

We can draw parallels to the coffee industry, which similarly comprises small plantation owners and more profitable downstream actors. In his recent sustainability report on the coffee industry, economist Jeffrey Sachs’ proposal for a global fund to fill the financial gaps for sustainability investments in coffee producing regions garnered vivid discussion.  

Currently, low and unpredictable rubber prices are a constraint to smallholders who produce the bulk of global rubber output. Transparency is critical in the purchasing process, and this kind of disruption typically comes hand in hand with embracing new strategies. 

Under the purview of the Strategy & Objectives Working Group, capacity building and extension services have been identified as potential measures to mitigate the root causes of the social and environmental impact from the natural rubber supply market. Implementing these at scale for the whole industry will require considerable financial investment.   

With the above considerations in mind, GPSNR is exploring new approaches to funding that would not be borne by a single segment of the industry, but in a manner incorporating the spirit of our shared responsibility. 

Enterprise Singapore organized an industry meeting on 14 January 2020, and invited GPSNR and Singapore Exchange to better understand the available options of an e-trading platform that could contribute to our funds. The meeting also discussed what could be the options, through GPSNR, to increase the uptake of the e-trading platform.

Tapping the vast potential of digitalization could present an exciting avenue of possibilities for GPSNR to better advance our vision of a fair, equitable and environmentally sound rubber value chain.      

The meeting was initiated by representatives from Enterprise Singapore, and panel speakers comprised representatives from GPSNR, Singapore Exchange and HeveaConnect. Participants included GPSNR members as well as other Natural Rubber buyers, producers, processors and traders .

News

Capacity Building for Natural Rubber Smallholders

The regional sub-Groups of the Capacity Building Working Group continue to advance discussions on developing country-specific capacity building goals and strategies for Indonesia, Thailand, Côte d’Ivoire and Myanmar. 

The sub-Groups have made progress in identifying three issues of priority per country. Focusing on these issues, the sub-Groups have pinpointed the drivers or causes of these issues, as well as developed priority actions to address them. Having already established who the existing stakeholders conducting on-the-ground capacity building projects are, the next step is to approach identified local agencies to discuss possible collaboration and partnership. 

The Capacity Building Working Group is developing a budget estimate that would provide a more comprehensive overview of the resources involved in carrying out the planned capacity building initiatives.

The members of the Working Group recognize the importance of involving smallholders and government agencies in the process of developing these capacity building plans, and are working towards engaging these parties in the discussion.

Meanwhile, the Smallholders Representation Working Group continues to finetune the onboarding programme for smallholders prior to the General Assembly 2020. A sub-Group has also been formed to consider the issue of financial support for smallholder participation at subsequent General Assembly meetings. 

Scroll to Top