Sustainable Supply Chain Professional
Level 3 — Circular Economy Strategy · Just Transition · Living Wage · ILO Compliance

Covers five primary regulatory instruments creating supply chain sustainability obligations. CSDDD applicability thresholds (over 1,000 employees and EUR 450 million global net turnover, phased from 2027–2029), due diligence obligations (risk identification, prevention and mitigation, complaints procedures, public communication), and civil liability provisions. EUDR covers seven forest-risk commodity categories (cattle, cocoa, coffee, palm oil, soya, wood, rubber and derived products), requires due diligence statements demonstrating non-deforestation on land since 31 December 2020, and operates through a country benchmarking system classifying countries as low, standard, or high risk. The EU Forced Labour Regulation, UK Modern Slavery Act, and US UFLPA are also covered.

Covers four primary non-regulatory frameworks. The UNGPs (2011) Protect-Respect-Remedy framework underpins both CSDDD and EUDR. The OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct (2018) covers six steps — embed responsible conduct, identify and assess adverse impacts, cease/prevent/mitigate impacts, track implementation, communicate outcomes, provide or cooperate in remediation — with sector supplements for minerals, agriculture, garments, and financial sector. The RBA Code of Conduct (labour, health and safety, environment, ethics) is the most widely adopted industry-specific supply chain code globally for electronics, with over 200 member companies. ISO 20400 provides the international reference for sustainable procurement policy design.

Connects supply chain management activities to GHG Protocol Scope 3 categories: Category 1 (purchased goods — directly affected by supplier emissions reduction engagement), Category 4 (upstream transportation — affected by logistics supplier selection and transport mode choices), and Category 12 (end-of-life treatment — connected to circular economy strategy in Module 3.1). A relevance screening exercise applies the GHG Protocol criteria to five industry sectors, establishing that Category 1 is among the two most material categories for all five. Distinguishes between calculating Scope 3 emissions (Track 1 Module 2.1) and managing supply chain activities to reduce them (the operational task Track 6 modules address).

Applies double materiality methodology to the value chain context, identifying ESRS topic standards most commonly material for supply chain-dependent industries. Impact materiality for manufacturing or agricultural companies frequently reaches the threshold for: labour rights violations (ESRS S2), community impacts from supplier operations (ESRS S3), deforestation and biodiversity loss from agricultural commodity production (ESRS E4), water pollution from supplier manufacturing (ESRS E2), and supply chain GHG emissions (ESRS E1 Scope 3). Financial materiality covers supplier disruption from regulatory enforcement, reputational damage from labour rights violations, and Scope 3 transition risk from carbon pricing through CBAM or equivalent mechanisms.

Covers the interaction between CSDDD due diligence obligations and CSRD disclosure obligations, mapping the bidirectional data and process flows: the CSDDD due diligence process generates risk identification evidence feeding CSRD disclosure; the CSRD double materiality assessment identifies the topics requiring enhanced CSDDD due diligence; the CSDDD complaints mechanism generates case data informing CSRD S2, S3, and G1 disclosures. CSDDD creates an operational obligation requiring action and legal liability for failure to act; CSRD creates a disclosure obligation requiring description of how material impacts, risks, and opportunities are identified and managed. This compliance architecture provides the structural foundation for the full Track 6 module sequence.

Covers the product lifecycle mapping methodology applied to the case product category using a simplified material flow analysis (MFA) rather than a full LCA. The MFA output is a Sankey diagram showing material inputs at each production stage, product output, waste and emissions at each stage, and the end-of-life destination split (landfill, incineration, mechanical recycling, chemical recycling, composting, and reuse). Data sources: production data from operational records, material intensity coefficients from the Ecoinvent database or WRAP material flow data, waste generation data from site records or sector benchmarks, and end-of-life destination data from national waste statistics and material recovery facilities data. The MFA establishes the baseline against which circular interventions are measured in subsequent units.

Covers circular economy strategy selection using the Ellen MacArthur Foundation hierarchy as the selection framework, prioritising product lifetime extension (design for durability and repairability) above product reuse and remanufacturing above material recycling. Strategy feasibility assessment covers four criteria: technical feasibility (can the product be designed for the selected circular strategy without compromising primary function?), economic feasibility (does the strategy generate revenue or cost savings offsetting operational cost?), logistics feasibility (can the required reverse logistics infrastructure be designed and operated at acceptable cost?), and market feasibility (is there consumer demand for circular product formats?). The assessment produces a shortlist of viable circular strategies for take-back system design in Unit 3.1.3 and business model design in Unit 3.1.4.

Covers take-back system design across three components. Return channel architecture: retailer return points (most appropriate for products with short consumer lifecycles), postal return (suitable for small, high-value products with long lifecycles), third-party collection network (specialist reverse logistics providers), or manufacturer direct collection (appropriate for large products or B2B markets). Product assessment and routing process: decision framework specifying refurbishment quality threshold (refurbished resale), parts recovery threshold (spare parts disassembly), or material recycling, with the routing decision tree specifying assessment criteria, assessment cost, and value recovery at each outcome. Operational economics: total cost of take-back operations against refurbished product sale revenue and avoided virgin material procurement cost.

Covers design and financial modelling of three circular business models. Product-as-a-service (PaaS): manufacturer retains product ownership and charges a periodic fee for product function; financial model covers revenue per unit per year, service cost per unit per year, end-of-life cost and residual value, and NPV comparison against the conventional linear sale model. Extended warranty and repair service: fee-based maintenance and repair extending useful life, reducing warranty return rates. Certified refurbished product resale: capturing revenue from returned products meeting the refurbishment quality threshold. For each model: incremental revenue, incremental cost, and incremental profit contribution relative to the linear baseline. The financial model also quantifies the GHG emission reduction from each circular strategy, providing data for ESRS E5 disclosure and SBTi Scope 3 Category 11 and 12 reduction contribution.

Covers the EU Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation (ESPR, in force 2024, delegated acts from 2025) requirements for durability, repairability, and recyclability across the product categories most immediately relevant to manufacturing and consumer goods companies (electronics, textiles, furniture, and steel), and the product design implications for each. The ESRS E5 disclosure scope covers material consumption reduction targets, take-back programme volumes, proportion of products designed to circular design standards, and circular business model revenue. The board business case assembles the financial model from Unit 3.1.4, ESPR compliance cost avoidance, Scope 3 emission reduction contribution, and ESRS E5 disclosure value into a presentation structured for a corporate board investment decision. The capstone deliverable is the complete circular economy strategy document and board business case.

Covers the Anker Research Institute living wage benchmarking methodology — calculating the wage needed to afford a decent standard of living (nutritionally adequate diet, decent housing, education for children, healthcare, transportation, and a provision for unexpected events) — and its application to the supplier countries in the case supply chain. The Institute publishes living wage estimates for over 70 countries and many subnational regions, updated annually, recognised by GRI (GRI 202), CSRD ESRS S2, and many retailer and brand supplier codes of conduct. The wage gap analysis compares the Anker estimate against three reference points: national statutory minimum wage, garment sector industry average wage, and actual wages paid by assessed suppliers. Quantifies the living wage gap as the percentage by which actual wages fall below the benchmark and identifies the countries and supplier categories with the largest gaps as the starting point for Unit 3.2.2.

Covers the design of a living wage roadmap for priority suppliers — specifying current average wage, living wage benchmark, annual increment required to reach living wage within a target timeline (typically three to five years), the monitoring mechanism (annual wage disclosure request or third-party wage audit), and available buyer support — and four buyer support mechanisms: long-term purchase commitments (multi-year agreements providing revenue certainty for wage investment), price negotiation reform (accounting for the cost of living wage payments rather than squeezing supplier margins), capacity building support (wage analysis, payroll system improvement, and productivity enhancement that enables higher wages without proportional cost increases), and public commitment (the buyer's CSRD sustainability statement and CDP disclosure creating reputational accountability that reinforces commercial commitments). The roadmap must be negotiated with the supplier and with worker representatives where collective bargaining coverage applies.

Covers the methodology for assessing the community economic impact of supply chain restructuring scenarios: shifting to renewable-powered supplier facilities, automating labour-intensive processes to reduce Scope 3 emission intensity, or geographic re-sourcing to suppliers with lower emission intensity. Four impact categories: employment impact (direct jobs affected in the restructured or exited facility, indirect employment multiplier effects in the local economy using input-output economic multiplier data, and local labour market reabsorption capacity), income impact (household income change, proportion of primary earners, impact on household consumption), community infrastructure impact (local school, health, and utility dependence on supplier tax revenue or corporate social investment), and gender impact (disproportionate effect on female workers who represent the majority of garment industry workforces). Each restructuring scenario has a defined CSDDD obligation to consider these impacts before proceeding.

Covers the design of the just transition programme across five components. Retraining and reskilling: skills gap identification between current roles and roles available in the transition-adjusted supply chain, curriculum design using publicly available vocational training programmes or buyer-funded development, and delivery logistics for workers without digital learning infrastructure. Severance and income support: at least the legal minimum in the relevant jurisdiction, supplemented by the buyer where the legal minimum is materially below an adequate transition payment, plus interim income support during retraining. Alternative employment facilitation: connecting affected workers with other suppliers with hiring needs, supporting supplier diversification into new product lines, and engaging local government employment agencies. Worker and community participation in programme governance: the ILO core principle of social dialogue requiring worker representatives (trade union or worker committee) and community representatives in the governance structure, with input reflected in the programme design and an accessible grievance mechanism.

Covers the ILO core convention compliance documentation required for the just transition programme. Convention 87 (freedom of association) and Convention 98 (right to organise and collective bargaining) require that workers have the right to form or join trade unions and bargain collectively during the restructuring process. Convention 111 (non-discrimination) prohibits discriminatory restructuring decisions (selecting workers for redundancy on the basis of gender, union membership, or ethnicity). Conventions 29 and 105 (forced labour) prohibit coercive practices in the restructuring process. The social safeguard documentation package covers: impact assessment summary, programme design document, worker and community participation records, ILO compliance documentation, and monitoring and evaluation framework. Designed to satisfy IFC Performance Standard 2 (labour and working conditions) and IFC Performance Standard 5 (land acquisition and involuntary resettlement) for suppliers in DFI-financed projects, and CSRD ESRS S2 and S3 disclosure requirements. The capstone deliverable is the complete just transition programme design document and social safeguard documentation package.