Transform value chains through sustainable procurement

Submitted through the COP31 Sustainable Transformation Awards · SKD Türkiye (WBCSD Global Network Partner)

The company manufactures tyres in Türkiye and employs more than 1,000 people, with a purchased goods and services base that spans domestic and international suppliers.

The emissions profile forced the issue: 98 per cent of the company's emissions arise in Scope 3, which means the decarbonisation question is a procurement question rather than a production one. Alongside that, environmental impact in the supply chain sat next to human rights, ethics and child labour risks that were not being managed to the same standard, in a supplier base with low sustainability maturity.

The practical obstacle was visibility. Data was fragmented and traceability was limited, so neither risk nor progress could be measured supplier by supplier.

Regulation was tightening at the same time, through science-based target validation, the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD). The company's response was to build a system that measures and improves performance rather than one that only demonstrates compliance.

Sustainable Procurement, known internally as SusPro, was launched in 2024 and scaled into a permanent programme, with 2023 as the baseline year. It is managed against the company's 2030 sustainability targets and against a science-based target to secure sustainability commitments from suppliers representing 79 per cent of Scope 3 emissions by 2028 (1).

Location of the initiative: Türkiye, covering the company's domestic and international supplier base

SusPro joins measurement, improvement and verification into one supplier management system, so that a supplier's environmental, social and governance position is assessed, acted on and re-checked in the same cycle rather than in separate exercises.

Criticality is defined by emissions weight rather than by spend alone. Following the science-based target approach, suppliers representing two-thirds of Scope 3 emissions were prioritised and the scope was validated by the Science Based Targets initiative; the selection criteria were then widened to take in water, biodiversity, regulatory risk and purchasing volume.

Nature risk is screened with established methods: critical raw materials are identified through the Science Based Targets Network approach, and water and biodiversity exposure is analysed with WWF tools.

The measurement layer is standardised. Scope 3 emissions are calculated using the GHG Protocol and ISO 14064 methodologies, targets are validated externally, and supplier ESG performance is tracked through a third-party assessment platform combined with on-site audits.

The programme also acts on the causes of emissions rather than only on reporting: sustainable raw materials, waste management, circularity, the elimination of single-use plastics and near-sourcing projects sit inside the same structure.

Social requirements are not a separate track. Human rights, business ethics and zero tolerance of child labour are integrated into supplier commitments, audits and corrective action in the same workflow as emissions and materials, supported by the SpeakHub channel.

Figure 1: The eight workstreams of the SusPro programme: on-site audit, digital evaluation, material circularity and waste management, localisation and nearby projects, science-based target management, supplier mapping, due diligence, and policy preparation and revision.

Figure 2: Progress towards the science-based supplier target: suppliers representing 45 per cent of Scope 3 emissions held sustainability commitments in the 2023 baseline year and 68 per cent by 2025, against a 79 per cent target for 2028.

Sustainability Impact

Climate

The programme targets Scope 3 emissions, which account for 98 per cent of the company's total, and it is built on the science-based target route rather than on voluntary supplier pledges. Scope 3 emissions are calculated under Category 1: Purchased goods and services of the GHG Protocol Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standard (2011). Emissions are calculated using the GHG Protocol and ISO 14064 methodologies against a 2023 baseline, and the targets are validated by the Science Based Targets initiative (1). Supplier prioritisation covers two-thirds of Scope 3 emissions, and the validated target is that suppliers representing 79 per cent of Scope 3 emissions hold sustainability commitments by 2028.

Delivered reduction stands at 12,600 tonnes of CO2 a year, and suppliers representing 68 per cent of Scope 3 emissions now hold sustainability commitments, up from 45 per cent in the 2023 baseline year. 16 near-sourcing projects contribute by shortening transport distances, and supplier Scope 3 target management is monitored through digital platforms rather than annual surveys.

Performance is disclosed through the CDP Climate and Water questionnaires, where the company entered the A List in the Supplier Engagement category (2).

Nature

Nature risk is screened before it is managed. Critical raw materials are identified through the Science Based Targets Network approach, and water and biodiversity exposure is analysed with WWF tools, so that supplier selection reflects ecosystem risk and not only carbon.

Natural rubber is the material where deforestation risk concentrates. Risk assessments have been completed, 100 per cent compliance with the EU Deforestation Regulation has been achieved and traceability has been raised above 90 per cent.

On materials and circularity, the recycled plastic content used has reached 73 per cent and the sustainable raw material ratio 30 per cent, alongside waste management and single-use plastic reduction work inside the same programme.

Chemicals compliance is tracked in parallel: 100 per cent compliance with REACH has been achieved and Responsible Minerals Assurance Process conformity is monitored.

Social

The social requirements carry the same measurement discipline as the environmental ones. A policy aligned with International Labour Organisation (ILO) standards sets zero tolerance of child labour, and 100 per cent of suppliers have given commitments covering environment, human rights and ethics.

Training reached 100 per cent completion among both critical suppliers and the internal procurement teams, which puts requirement-setters and requirement-holders on the same standard.

Assurance is practical rather than declaratory: 11 on-site audits and 60 digital assessments have been carried out, producing 70 verified improvement plans and 367 corrective actions that are tracked to closure. The SpeakHub reporting mechanism is accessible to all stakeholders.

16 near-sourcing projects were run with local communities, delivering economic contribution alongside emissions reduction, and practices to increase women's employment are part of the same social agenda.

Business Impact

Benefits

The programme raised the sustainable purchasing score by 20 per cent, which is the internal measure of how far ESG criteria have actually been embedded in buying decisions rather than in policy.

Regulatory exposure falls as a direct result. With 100 per cent EUDR compliance and traceability above 90 per cent on natural rubber, 100 per cent REACH compliance and due diligence procedures in place, the company is positioned for CSDDD-type requirements rather than reacting to them.

Visibility replaced fragmented data. End-to-end supplier data means risk concentration, target progress and corrective action status are visible in one system, which shortens the response time when a supplier issue appears.

External recognition followed: the A List position in the CDP Supplier Engagement category (2), and an award in the Best Business Model category for the Bridgestone Europe, Middle East, and Africa region (EMEA) in the group's global awards.

16 near-sourcing projects shorten supply lines, which reduces logistics exposure as well as emissions, and supplier ESG maturity rises across the base rather than only at the audited suppliers.

Costs

The recurring cost base is the digital monitoring infrastructure, supplier training programmes, third-party assessments and on-site audits, together with the consultancy support and joint action plans used to accelerate supplier development. These are planned resources rather than one-off project spend.

Internal effort is significant: the programme runs through task forces led by the Senior Leadership Team and draws on procurement, sustainability, quality, technology, legal and compliance functions in parallel.

Funding is met mainly through existing strategic partnerships rather than a dedicated new budget line, which is what allowed the programme to scale quickly after launch.

The main dependencies are the pace at which suppliers can transform, the quality of the data they provide, and the divergence between regulatory regimes in different markets. These are managed through standardised processes, digital monitoring and continuous training rather than by removing suppliers.

Impact Beyond Sustainability And Business

Co-benefits

Near-sourcing produces local economic contribution in the communities where the projects sit, which is a development outcome rather than an environmental one.

Suppliers gain transferable capability. An assessed, trained and audited supplier can use the same evidence with other customers, so the investment made in one relationship raises that supplier's standing across its market.

Because supplier ESG performance is measured, disclosed and improved openly, sustainability expectations in the sector are redefined and competition moves onto that ground, which extends the effect beyond the company's own supplier base.

The model is shared with the global factories of the parent group, which spreads the method further than a single national supply chain.

Potential side-effects

Audits, digital assessments, training and corrective action plans impose a real administrative load on suppliers, and that load falls hardest on smaller firms with the least capacity to absorb it. Consultancy support and joint action plans are used to offset this, but the imbalance does not disappear.

Emission-weighted prioritisation is efficient but partial by design: suppliers outside the critical set receive less attention, which is why the selection criteria were widened beyond carbon to water, biodiversity, regulatory risk and purchasing volume.

Self-reported supplier data carries a quality risk, which is why digital assessment is paired with on-site audit and third-party verification rather than used alone.

Divergent regulation across markets means a single supplier standard can over-specify in one jurisdiction and under-specify in another, and standardised processes have to be revisited as rules change.

Typical Business Profile

The model suits manufacturers whose emissions sit overwhelmingly in purchased goods and services, and which buy direct materials from a supplier base that is large enough to need segmentation but small enough to audit at the top end.

It is directly transferable to tyre, automotive, chemicals and other manufacturing sectors with high supply chain impact, and it presumes a procurement function willing to make ESG a buying criterion rather than a post-award questionnaire.

Delivery requires procurement and sustainability working jointly, with quality, technology, legal and compliance functions attached, plus a digital assessment platform and an audit capability.

Approach

1. Locate the emissions before redesigning the process: Calculate Scope 3 with the GHG Protocol and ISO 14064 methodologies, establish the share of total emissions that sits in the supply chain, and fix a baseline year, which here was 2023.

2. Prioritise suppliers by emissions weight and have the scope validated: Select the suppliers that represent two-thirds of Scope 3 emissions using the science-based target approach and submit the scope for external validation, so that effort concentrates where the emissions actually are.

3. Widen the criticality criteria beyond carbon: Add water, biodiversity, regulatory risk and purchasing volume to the selection rules, so that suppliers with low emissions but high nature or compliance risk are not missed.

4. Screen raw materials and locations for nature risk: Identify critical raw materials through the Science Based Targets Network approach and analyse water and biodiversity exposure with WWF tools before setting supplier requirements.

5. Rewrite the policy and make commitment a condition: Update the responsible procurement policy in line with International Labour Organisation (ILO) standards, set zero tolerance of child labour, and obtain commitments on environment, human rights and ethics from every supplier.

6. Train both sides before assessing either: Run training to full completion for suppliers and for the internal procurement teams, because buyers who cannot apply the criteria will not enforce them.

7. Assess digitally at scale, then audit on site where risk concentrates: Use digital ESG assessments across the prioritised base and reserve on-site audits and due diligence for the highest-risk suppliers, so breadth and depth are covered at proportionate cost.

8. Convert every finding into a tracked corrective action: Turn audit and assessment results into verified improvement plans with named corrective actions, follow them to closure, and monitor them through the same route.

9. Attack the sources of emissions in parallel: Run near-sourcing projects, raise recycled and sustainable raw material content, and cut single-use plastics, so that supplier engagement is matched by structural change in what is bought and from where.

10. Verify externally and govern at board level: Report through CDP Climate and Water and third-party assurance, include ESG performance in the main KPI set, report quarterly to the CEO-chaired sustainability committee and place the programme under the oversight of the board's corporate governance committee.

Stakeholders Involved

• Project leads: The programme is run by the Sustainability Task Force, led by the Senior Leadership Team, which handles supplier prioritisation, audits, risk assessment, performance tracking, improvement plans and Scope 3 reduction work, and which also sets targets, budgets, financing plans and the medium to long-term roadmap. The task force reports quarterly to the Sustainability Committee chaired by the CEO, and the programme is reviewed under the oversight of the Corporate Governance Committee reporting to the Board, so that supplier ESG performance is governed at the same level as financial performance.

• Company functions: Procurement and sustainability teams hold joint responsibility for delivery, working with the quality, technology, legal and compliance functions. ESG performance is included in the main KPI set, which is what keeps the functions aligned to one measure rather than to separate departmental targets.

• Main providers: A third-party ESG assessment platform provides the digital supplier scoring, independent assurance providers verify the reported sustainability data, and external consultancy support is used to accelerate supplier improvement plans. Nature and climate methodologies are drawn from international framework bodies rather than from commercial tools.

• Other: Suppliers take an active part in programme design and decision-making, contributing directly to prioritisation, risk assessment and improvement plans, with feedback collected through digital platforms, site audits and third-party verification. Public authorities are engaged particularly on EUDR compliance and traceability in the natural rubber supply chain. Civil society methodologies and sector good practice are integrated into the process, local communities take part through the near-sourcing projects, and the global factories of the parent group share the method.

Key Parameters To Consider

The programme was launched in 2024 and the impact data covers the 2024 to 2026 period, with 2023 as the baseline, so the results reported are from an early but externally verified phase rather than from a mature programme.

It is managed against the company's 2030 sustainability targets and against the validated science-based target for 2028 supplier coverage, which sets the pace of supplier onboarding.

The structure is modular, standards-based and digital, which is what makes it portable across geographies, sectors and supplier sizes; the parts that must be localised are the regulatory requirements and the audit network.

Financing is drawn mainly from existing strategic partnerships, and the principal risks tracked are supplier transformation speed, data quality and compliance with divergent regulation.

Implementation And Operations Tips

Prioritise by emissions, not by supplier count or spend. Weighting the base by Scope 3 contribution and having that scope externally validated is what stops the programme spreading itself across hundreds of low-impact suppliers.

Pair breadth with depth. Digital assessment covers the base at low cost but is self-reported; on-site audit is credible but expensive. Neither works alone, and the ratio between them is the main cost lever.

Train the buyers as well as the suppliers. Full completion on the internal side is what turns policy into a purchasing decision.

Treat social and environmental requirements as one workflow. Running child labour, ethics and human rights checks through the same audit, improvement plan and corrective action route as emissions avoids a second parallel system and a second set of supplier fatigue.

Budget for corrective action, not just assessment. The value appears in the plans that are verified and closed, and that is where the effort concentrates once assessment is running.

External Links

• 2024 sustainability report

• Independent third-party external assurance statement

Source List

(1) Science Based Targets initiative validation

(2) CDP disclosure