Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 10:11 pm
Time: 10:11 pm
Results for supply chain management
2 results foundAuthor: Ocean Conservancy Title: Stemming the Tide: Land-Based Strategies for a Plastic-Free Ocean Summary: The amount of unmanaged plastic waste entering the ocean - known as plastic-waste leakage - has reached crisis levels and has caused significant economic and environmental damage. The problem warrants a collective global response. The first step should focus on the five countries that together account for between 55 and 60 percent of the total plastic-waste leakage; this report describes an integrated set of measures (or levers) that together could reduce leakage in these five countries by 65 percent and reduce total global leakage by approximately 45 percent by 2025. This is the prerequisite for successfully ending plastic-waste leakage entirely by 2035. For each lever, the report specifies costs and plastic-waste-leakage reduction potential. Total costs of implementing these levers could be contained at an estimated $5 billion a year - an investment with significant returns to the entire economy. That amount could largely be met through typical project-financing mechanisms involving the public, private, and multilateral sectors. Private industry has an important role to play in catalyzing public and private investment by strategically reducing capital costs and investment risk. Assembling the appropriate financing approach, along with the need for political commitment, location-specific data and analysis, and action to align government policies and regulatory environments, will require coordinated action across public and private stakeholders. Although each set of actions described in the report has a different lead time - with effects in the short, medium, and long term - they all require an immediate start if we as a society are to move toward peaking and then essentially eliminating the leakage of plastic into the ocean. The agenda described in this report recognizes ongoing efforts such as capital-light improvements to uncontained dump sites located near waterways and heavy penalties for dumping of waste into waterways by waste-transportation systems. But it also suggests new priorities, acceleration of existing initiatives, increased private-sector commitment, and a focus on "ocean-smart" measures geared primarily toward reducing leakage of plastic to the ocean. And while this report focuses on five countries with especially high levels of plastic-waste leakage, we believe it also sets forth a replicable model that can be applied in other countries that would benefit from improved waste management systems. An article in the February 13, 2015, issue of the journal Science added to an already robust body of research suggesting that the volume of plastic leaking into the sea - estimated at approximately eight million metric tons a year - greatly exceeds any previous estimates. Evidence of the environmental and economic damage is mounting. In a business-as-usual scenario of unchecked plastic-waste leakage, the global quantity of plastic in the ocean would nearly double to 250 million metric tons by 2025. A broad range of stakeholders from the public and private sectors is aligning on ocean plastic as a major global issue. Capitalizing on this momentum requires a global agenda, underpinned by a strong understanding of the possible solutions and their economics. This report is meant to provide a basis for global action. It is the result of corporate and nongovernmental-organization (NGO) parties coming together on this issue and represents emerging collaborative action across the consumer - goods value chain and between the private, public, and social sectors. Details: Washington, DC: Ocean Conservancy and McKinsey Center for Business and Environment, 2015. 48p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 7, 2019 at: https://oceanconservancy.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/full-report-stemming-the.pdf Year: 2015 Country: International URL: https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/sustainability/our-insights/stemming-the-tide-land-based-strategies-for-a-plastic-free-ocean Shelf Number: 155358 Keywords: Environmental Crime Marine Issues Maritime Plastic-Waste Leakage Supply Chain Management |
Author: Beck, Adrian Title: The GCC Loss Prevention Survey 2017 Summary: Executive Summary: Background to the Survey: Findings: Loss Prevention in an Organisational Context: Perceptions of Loss Prevention: Measuring the Impact of Loss: No representative data on loss prevention covering the GCC region currently exists. The data presented in this report comes from a survey based upon up to 18 respondents taking part in an interactive workshop where they could provide feedback in real time via interactive technology on 43 questions relating to loss prevention. It was not possible to verify the representativeness of the sample so caution needs to be used when interpreting the results. Virtually all companies had a loss prevention department; largest proportion of heads of loss prevention reported directly to Retail Operations (33%). A large proportion had a written corporate policy on loss prevention and an annual target for loss (78%). Most had an audit department (72%); the most frequent auditing period was 6 months (50%) and the majority were carried out internally (56%). Very few are currently using or planning to use self-scan checkout technologies. Majority are now offering or planning to offer e-commerce. Respondents felt that loss prevention was generally well resourced and that it was considered a priority within their business. However, awareness of the current rate of loss/shrinkage was not thought to be high amongst senior managers and contact with the CEO to discuss loss prevention was relatively low. The Retail Operations function was regarded as the most willing group to help with loss prevention, while Buying/Trading, Human Resources and Supply Chain operations were considered the least willing. Relatively few respondents were reaching out to manufacturers/suppliers to seek help to deal with specific loss problems. Respondents included a remarkably wide range of types of loss within their overall loss number - many more than seen in other regions. Given this, perhaps it is not surprising that a relatively large proportion thought they knew what the causes were for a large amount of their losses. Nearly one-half of respondents thought that 20% or less of their losses were due to malicious causes such as crime. Process/admin errors were thought to be the biggest cause of loss (33%). Most respondents measured their losses at cost price (69%). A majority could measure their losses at SKU level (56%) although a significant minority could only do this at store or company level (31%). When losses were measured at cost price, it was calculated that the overall range was between 0.98% and 1.42%, with the mid-point calculation being 1.21%. If an assumption is made about overall profit margins, a retail price calculation of this number suggests it could be approximately 1.7% - significantly higher than seen in other surveys carried out round the world. Most respondents thought that their loss number had decreased from the previous year (57%). Most had a policy in place to prosecute customers caught stealing and a majority said it was in regular use. A similar amount said the same about a policy in place to prosecute staff caught stealing although fewer said it was in regular use. Extrapolated data suggests that respondents spent between 0.51% and 0.91% of retail turnover (at cost prices) on loss prevention, with the mid-point calculation being 0.71%. This is significantly higher than found in other regions. Most thought that their budget had stayed the same from the previous year (44%). When allocating funding it was calculated that between 28% and 47% was spent on human resources compared with software and hardware. The mid-point calculation was 37%. There was a high take up of EAS technologies, particularly using hard and soft tags. A majority were using data mining technologies (53%). In terms of future loss prevention investment, the largest proportion selected more/better staff training (38%) followed by audit and process management systems (25%). Details: Leicester, England: University of Leicester, 2017. 33p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 14, 2019 at: http://www.jard.me/source/brochure/12_1509469103.pdf Year: 2017 Country: International URL: http://www.jard.me/source/brochure/12_1509469103.pdf Shelf Number: 156981 Keywords: Loss Prevention Retail Stores Retail Theft Shoplifting Stealing Supply Chain Management |