While the efforts by actors on the buyer-side of value chains – such as brands and retailers – to address upstream labour abuses are well documented, there is a lack of research into how actors on the production-side of value chains – such as raw material producers – can identify and address downstream labour risks. This research presents the findings of an action research project that focused on the Australian cotton industry. By applying a sense-making lens, we propose four properties that can be used to identify labour risk in global value chains, providing insights into the capacity of producers to address downstream labour abuses. We suggest that there is a possibility for a ‘book-end’ approach that combines upstream and downstream actions by buyers and producers in global value chains.
AnconaD (2011) Sensemaking – framing and acting in the unknown. In: SnookSANohriaNKhuranaR (eds) The Handbook for Teaching Leadership: Knowing, Doing, and Being. London: Sage Publications Ltd, pp. 3–19.
3.
AnnerM (2019) Predatory purchasing practices in global apparel value chains and the employment relations squeeze in the Indian garment export industry. International Labour Review158(4): 705–727.
4.
AntoniniCBeckCLarrinagaC (2020) Subpolitics and sustainability reporting boundaries. The case of working conditions in global value chains. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal33(7): 1535–1567.
5.
AqlanFLamSS (2015) Value chain risk modelling and mitigation. International Journal of Production Research53(18): 5640–5656.
BarrientosSSmithS (2007) Do workers benefit from ethical trade? Assessing codes of labour practice in global production systems. Third World Quarterly28(4): 713–729.
10.
BeskePSeuringS (2014) Putting sustainability into supply chain management. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal19(3): 322–331.
11.
ChatterjiAKDurandRLevineDI, et al. (2016) Do ratings of firms converge? Implications for managers, investors and strategy researchers. Strategic Management Journal37(8): 1597–1614.
12.
CilibertiFde GrootGde HaanJ, et al. (2009) Codes to coordinate value chains: SMEs’ experiences with SA8000. Value Chain Management: An International Journal14(2): 117–127.
13.
ClarkeTBoersmaM (2019) Global corporations and global value chains: The disaggregation of corporations? In: ClarkeTO’BrienJO’KelleyC (eds) The Oxford Handbook of the Corporation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 318–365.
CrinisVVickersA (eds) (2017) Labour in the Clothing Industry in the Asia Pacific. Routledge Studies in the Growth Economies of Asia 134. New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
17.
DorfleitnerGHalbritterGNguyenM (2015) Measuring the level and risk of corporate responsibility–An empirical comparison of different ESG rating approaches. Journal of Asset Management16(7): 450–466.
18.
EllisSCShockleyJHenryRM (2011) Making sense of value disruption risk research: A conceptual framework grounded in enactment theory. Journal of Value Chain Management47(2): 65–96.
19.
FiaschiDGiulianiENieriF, et al. (2020) How bad is your company? Measuring corporate wrongdoing beyond the magic of ESG metrics. Business Horizons63(3): 287–299.
20.
GereffiG (1994) The organization of buyer-driven global commodity chains: How U.S. Retailers shape overseas production networks. In: GereffiGKorzeniewiczM (eds) Commodity Chains and Global Capitalism. CT: Praeger Publishers, pp. 95–122.
21.
GereffiG (1999) International trade and industrial upgrading in the apparel commodity chain. Journal of International Economics48(1): 37–70.
22.
GereffiG (2001) Beyond the producer-driven/buyer-driven dichotomy The evolution of global value chains in the internet Era. IDS bulletin32(3): 30–40.
23.
GiannakisMPapadopoulosT (2016) Value chain sustainability: A risk management approach. International Journal of Production Economics171(4): 455–470.
24.
GoldSTrautrimsATroddZ (2015) Modern slavery challenges to value chain management. Value Chain Management20(5): 485–494.
25.
GurneyVJurewiczP (2013) To the Spinner: Forging a Chain to Responsible Cotton Sourcing. Oakland, C.A.: Responsible Sourcing Network. Available at:https://www.sourcingnetwork.org/download_form(accessed 13 April 2021).
26.
HammerNPlugorR (2019) Disconnecting labour? The labour process in the UK fast fashion value chain. Work, Employment and Society33(6): 913–928.
27.
HandfieldRSunHRothenbergL (2020) Assessing value chain risk for apparel production in low cost countries using newsfeed analysis. Value Chain Management: An International Journal25(6): 803–821.
28.
HeckmannIComesTNickelS (2015) A critical review on value chain risk – definition, measure and modeling. Omega52: 119–132.
IslamMADeeganCGrayR (2018) Social compliance audits and multinational corporation supply chain: Evidence from a study of the rituals of social audits. Accounting and Business Research48(2): 190–224.
33.
IvanovDDolguiASokolovB (2019) The impact of digital technology and industry 4.0 on the ripple effect and supply chain risk analytics. International Journal of Production Research57(3): 829–846.
34.
JosserandEKaineS (2016) Labour standards in global value chains: Disentangling Workers’ voice, vicarious voice, power relations, and regulation. Relations Industrielles / Industrial Relations71(4): 741–767.
35.
KoerberCP (2009) Corporate responsibility standards: Current implications and future possibilities for peace through commerce. Journal of Business Ethics89(4): 461–480.
36.
KoshyEKoshyVWatermanH (2011) Action Research in Healthcare. London: Sage.
37.
LangenbergSWesselingH (2016) Making sense of weick’s organising. A philosophical exploration. Philosophy of Management15(3): 221–240.
38.
LockeRM (2003) The promise and perils of globalization: The case of nike. Management: Inventing and delivering its future39: 1–46.
39.
MarimonFAlonso-AlmeidaM del MRodríguezM del P, et al. (2012) The worldwide diffusion of the global reporting initiative: What is the point?Journal of Cleaner Production33: 132–144.
40.
MezzadriA (2017) The Sweatshop Regime: Labouring Bodies, Exploitation, and Garments Made in India. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
41.
MinHParkHAhnSB (2017) Measuring the supply chain risk in offshoring countries using data envelopment analysis and the analytic hierarchy process. Benchmarking: An International Journal24(7): 1977–1994.
42.
MolMJvan TulderRJMBeijePR (2005) Antecedents and performance consequences of international outsourcing. International Business Review14(5): 599–617.
43.
MuellerMdos SantosVGSeuringS (2009) The contribution of environmental and social standards towards ensuring legitimacy in supply chain governance. Journal of Business Ethics89(4): 509–523.
44.
NathSDEwejeGBathurstR (2019) The invisible Side of managing sustainability in global supply chains: Evidence from multitier apparel suppliers. Journal of Business Logistics 42(2): 1–26.
45.
NolanJBoersmaM (2019) Addressing Modern Slavery. Sydney: UNSW Press Limited.
46.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2018) OECD Due diligence guidance for responsible supply chains in the garment and footwear sector. Available at:https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/9789264290587-en.pdf(accessed 5 February 2021).
47.
PayneA (2021) Designing Fashion’s Future: Present Practice and Tactics for Sustainable Change. London; New York: Bloomsbury Visual Arts.
48.
PerryPWoodS (2018) The international fashion supply chain and corporate social responsibility. In: Fernie J and Sparks L (eds) Logistics and Retail Management. London: Kogan Page, pp. 97–127.
49.
RaoSGoldsbyTJ (2009) Supply chain risks: A review and typology. The International Journal of Logistics Management20(1): 97–123.
RoehrichJKGrosvoldJHoejmoseSU (2014) Reputational risks and sustainable supply chain management: Decision making under bounded rationality. International Journal of Operations & Production Management34(5): 695–719.
52.
RosenEI (2002) Making Sweatshops The Globalization of the U. S. Apparel Industry. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press.
53.
RuggieJ (2007) Business and human rights: The evolving international agenda. American Journal of International Law 101(4): 819–840.
54.
RuggieJ (2013) Just Business: Multinational Corporations and Human Rights (Norton Global Ethics Series). New York: WW Norton & Company.
SemenovaNHasselLG (2015) On the validity of environmental performance metrics. Journal of Business Ethics132(2): 249–258.
57.
SimasMSGolsteijnLHuijbregtsMAJ, et al. (2014) The ‘Bad labor’ footprint: Quantifying the social impacts of globalization. Sustainability6(11): 7514–7540.
58.
StanczykACataldoZBlomeC, et al. (2017) The dark side of global sourcing: A systematic literature review and research agenda. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management47(1): 41–67.
SydowJFrenkelSJ (2013) Labor, risk, and uncertainty in global supply networks – exploratory insights. Journal of Business Logistics34(3): 236–247.
61.
TheuwsMOvereemP (2014) Flawed fabrics. Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations and India Committee of the Netherlands. Available at:https://www.somo.nl/flawed-fabrics/(accessed 8 February 2021).
62.
ThorntonLMAutryCWGligorDM, et al. (2013) Does socially responsible supplier selection Pay Off for customer firms? A cross-cultural comparison. Journal of Supply Chain Management49(3): 66–89.
63.
WatermanR (1993) Adhocracy: The Power to Change. 1st ed. New York: Norton agency titles.
64.
WeickKE (1995) Sensemaking in Organizations. Foundations for Organizational Science. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Ltd.
65.
WeickKE (2001) Making Sense of the Organization. Oxford, UK; Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
66.
WeickKESutcliffeKMObstfeldD (2005) Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science16(4): 409–421.
67.
WrightCF (2016) Leveraging reputational risk: Sustainable sourcing campaigns for improving labour standards in production networks. Journal of Business Ethics137(1): 195–210.
68.
YeungHWCoeNM (2015) Toward a dynamic theory of global production networks. Economic Geography91(1): 29–58.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
