ResponsibleSteel Consultation on Responsible Sourcing of Input Materials

JavaScript isn't enabled in your browser, so this file can't be opened. Enable and reload.

This form serves to capture stakeholder feedback on the draft requirements, options and consultation questions posed by ResponsibleSteel in this document here (https://www.responsiblesteel.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/ResponsibleSteel-Responsible-Sourcing-Requirements-Draft-1-0-for-Consultation.pdf). The form is available until 02 October 2020.

It is important that we get these additional requirements right since they will be key for achieving our vision of "maximising steel's contribution to a sustainable society". You will have seen from the draft document that we seem to have found consensus on a number of issues, but that there are outstanding questions we need to address. We are keen to get your views on them and to receive suggestions from you if you feel that there are other options than the ones proposed that are better placed to achieve our goal.

In the form below, we are posing questions to you related to each of the criteria, requirements, options and consultation questions in the draft document. The numbering in the form mirrors the numbering in the draft document. In your feedback, please be as constructive and precise as possible. At the very end of the form, there is a free text field where you can leave overarching comments.

Please feel free to spread the news about the ongoing consultation in your networks. We want to hear from as many different stakeholders as possible.

Thank you very much for your help in shaping these requirements!
The ResponsibleSteel Team

Email *

Please let us know your full name and the organisation you are with *

Background (to the consultation): Do you have any comments on this section?

Objective: Do you have any comments on this?

Background (to the draft requirements): Do you have any comments on this section?

Criterion 1. Responsible sourcing commitment: Do you have any general comments on this Criterion?

1.1 Are you fine with how this requirement has been drafted?

Yes

Clear selection

1.1 If you selected "No", what would you change and why?

1.2 Are you fine with how this requirement has been drafted?

Yes

Clear selection

1.2 If you selected "No", what would you change and why?

Guidance on Criterion 1: Do you have any comments on the guidance?

Criterion 2. Supply chain mapping: Do you have any general comments on this Criterion?

2.1 Are you fine with how this requirement has been drafted?

Yes

Clear selection

2.1 If you selected "No", what would you change and why?

2.2 Are you fine with how this requirement has been drafted?

Yes

Clear selection

2.2 If you selected "No", what would you change and why?

2.3 Are you fine with how this requirement has been drafted?

Yes

Clear selection

2.3 If you selected "No", what would you change and why?

2.4 Are you fine with how this requirement has been drafted?

Yes

Clear selection

2.4 If you selected "No", what would you change and why?

2.5 Are you fine with how this requirement has been drafted?

Yes

Clear selection

2.5 If you selected "No", what would you change and why?

2.6 Are you fine with how this requirement has been drafted?

Yes

Clear selection

2.6 If you selected "No", what would you change and why?

Guidance on Criterion 2: Do you have any comments on the guidance?

Criterion 3. Responsible sourcing claims: Do you have any general comments on this Criterion?

3.1 For BF-BOF sites: Are you fine with how this requirement has been drafted?

Yes

Clear selection

3.1 If you selected "No", what would you change and why?

Consultation question 1 on threshold for making 'certified' claims: Is 10% a credible threshold to start making claims or do you think that a lower or higher percentage would be more appropriate and, if so, which percentage?

Consultation question 2 on threshold for making 'certified' claims: If you favour the Option "Focussing on credible third-party verification rather than addressing ESG risks and impacts in supply chains" presented in the table, should steel companies be expected to have achieved, for example, 50% of verified input material before they would be allowed to sell 50% of their steel product as 'ResponsibleSteel certified'?

Guidance on Requirements 3.1: Do you have any comments on the guidance?

3.2 For EAF sites: Are you fine with how this requirement has been drafted?

Yes

Clear selection

3.2 If you selected "No", what would you change and why?

Consultation question on our approach to scrap: Do you have an alternative suggestion for how we could address scrap supply chains?

Guidance on Requirement 3.2: Do you have any comments on the guidance?

Consultation question on risk management: Which of the 3 presented Options would you prefer and why?

Focussing on credible third-party verification rather than addressing ESG risks and impacts in supply chains

Using ready-made tools for addressing ESG risks and impacts in supply chains

Using steel company's own methodology for addressing ESG risks and impacts in supply chains

Clear selection

Why did you select the risk management Option you selected? Or, if you did not select any of the Options, what other Option do you propose and why?

Consultation question on input materials to cover: Which of the 2 presented Options would you prefer and why? (see also Annex 1 of the consultation document for details)

Top 3 input material categories

Top purchasing power

Clear selection

Why did you select the input materials Option you selected? Or, if you did not select any of the Options, what other Option do you propose and why?

Criterion 4. Supply chain ESG risk and impact assessment and prioritisation: Do you have any general comments on this Criterion?

4.1 Are you fine with how this requirement has been drafted?

Yes

Clear selection

4.1 If you selected "No", what would you change and why?

4.2 Are you fine with how this requirement has been drafted?

Yes

Clear selection

4.2 If you selected "No", what would you change and why?

4.3 Are you fine with how this requirement has been drafted?

Yes

Clear selection

4.3 If you selected "No", what would you change and why?

Guidance on Criterion 4: Do you have any comments on the guidance?

Criterion 5. Supply chain ESG risk and impact prevention and mitigation: Do you have any general comments on this Criterion?

5.1 Are you fine with how this requirement has been drafted?

Yes

Clear selection

5.1 If you selected "No", what would you change and why?

5.2 Are you fine with how this requirement has been drafted?

Yes

Clear selection

5.2 If you selected "No", what would you change and why?

5.3 Are you fine with how this requirement has been drafted?

Yes

Clear selection

5.3 If you selected "No", what would you change and why?

5.4 Are you fine with how this requirement has been drafted?

Yes

Clear selection

5.4 If you selected "No", what would you change and why?

Criterion 6. Supply chain reporting: Do you have any general comments on this Criterion?

6.1 Are you fine with how this requirement has been drafted?

Yes

Clear selection

6.1 If you selected "No", what would you change and why?

Annex 2: Consultation question on other options: Are stakeholders in favour of exploring any of the options outlined here that we did not progress for the draft requirements? If so, which ones and why?

If you would you like to make any overarching comments, please leave them here:

A copy of your responses will be emailed to the address you provided.

Submit

Clear form

Never submit passwords through Google Forms.

reCAPTCHA

Privacy Terms

This content is neither created nor endorsed by Google. Report Abuse - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy

Forms