An Analysis of Dell and Walmart’s Initiatives to Replace Harmful

Chemicals in Supply Chains

Bruce CohenCorporate Sustainability Strategy

Professor Mathew GardnerHarvard University Extension School

December 10, 2014

A growing number of companies are moving to reduce harmful chemicals in their

products and supply chains. Dell and Walmart are among the leaders, moving well

beyond competitors both in adopting sustainable chemical polices to reduce and

eliminate harmful substances and innovating through designing new products made

entirely with safe chemicals.

This paper will examine the different approaches of Walmart and Dell in

implementing sustainable chemical programs. It will analyze their performance against a

set of industry best-practices including regulatory standards, chemical footprinting,

sustainability metrics, stakeholder engagement, and alternative assessments. The

paper first provides some context on the economic, political, and technological forces

moving companies to remove hazardous chemicals from their supply chains. The

business case for preemptive corporate regulation is considered, where companies

voluntarily adopt policies that exceed government standards in the face of broken U.S.

chemicals laws. Also discussed are technological advances in chemical-data

management, such as software platforms that enable companies to track harmful

components and ingredients in supply chains to meet chemical-specific restrictions

imposed by customers. Lastly, Dell and Walmart’s “cascading” effect is noted. Through

their sustainable chemical initiatives, these companies exert tremendous leverage on

competitors and firms in their supply chains to raise their sustainable chemical

standards.

Dell background and sustainability overview

Founded in 1984, Dell pioneered the concept of direct-retail sales of personal

computers. Founder Michael Dell would famously run ads in PC magazines, appealing

to customers looking for relatively high-quality PCs at modest prices. (Reference for

Business, 2014). Today, Dell is a $57 billion technology firm with products including

2

desktop computers, network servers, enterprise workstations and servers. In 2013, Dell

was taken private in a deal valued at $25 billion.

Overall, Dell’s sustainability focus is on environmental impacts, which it expresses in

a goal: total economic value generated exceeds total value of resources used by a

factor of ten—achieved by 2020. (Dell corporate responsibility report, 2014). Dell’s

sustainability report details a large set of environmental goals sought by 2020 including:

50% reduction in GHG emissions from facilities and logistics operations; 100% of

packaging that is compostable or recyclable; 90% of waste from Dell-operated facilities

diverted from landfills.

In the area of community and social impacts, Dell has a focus on improving the

lives of disadvantaged youth globally through technology, such as installing solar-

powered classrooms in communities in Nigeria that lack electricity infrastructure, and

working with NGOs to provide computer-literacy skills training to children in the

Philippines.

Walmart Background and sustainability overview

Walmart is the world’s Number 1 retailer with $476 billion in revenues. It is also the

world’s largest employer with over 2.1 million employees. It is notable that Walmart long

has been criticized for an absence of social responsibility in some areas, particularly

discriminatory and anti-labor practices.

Like Dell, Walmart has chosen to focus its considerable sustainability resources on

environmental impacts, with major initiatives in renewable-energy generation, waste,

and product sustainability. Walmart is the largest on-site clean-energy producer in the

U.S., with 2,250 MW of installed capacity. (Walmart Global Responsibility Report,

2014); it has a goal of reaching zero waste by 2025, currently diverting from landfills

82% of waste from U.S. stores and distribution facilities.

3

To help suppliers improve and measure their product sustainability, Walmart created

a Sustainability Index, developed in collaboration with The Sustainability Consortium, an

industry-widepartnership that develops sustainability standards for consumer products.

Walmart worked with 15 large suppliers—representing 30% of food and beverage sales

in North America—on a commodity optimization pilot, providing farmers with data and

tools to optimize fertilizer feeding and tilling practices in corn and soybean crop rotations

with the aim of reducing water usage and GHG emissions. (Walmart Global

Responsibility Report, 2014)

Walmart’s social responsibility initiatives are overseen by the Walmart Foundation,

which in 2013 made $1 billion in donations. One of the foundation’s focus areas is

hunger relief, where Walmart has made $250 million in grants to date and donated more

than 1 billion pounds of food. In disaster relief, Walmart in 2013 made $4 million in cash

and in-kind donations to 22 regions that suffered from natural disasters.

Business Case for Sustainable Chemicals

When it comes to the business case for sustainable chemicals in supply chains, one

first must understand the context of U.S. toxic chemical regulations. In the U.S.

hundreds of chemicals used in everyday household products from cosmetics and soap

to cleaning products have never been tested for toxicity to humans due to lax chemical

laws. (Greiner, 2012).

However, the European Union has banned many of these same chemicals, having

determined their exposure poses significant carcinogenic, mutagenic, and reproductive

toxic risk. Banned chemical include phthalates, found in shampoo, deodorant, and

fragrances and known to cause birth defects in male reproductive organs; polyvinyl

chloride (PVC), a component in electronic wires and cables that when burned produces

4

carcinogenic and reproductive toxins. (U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,

2009).

As a result, numerous U.S. companies have decided to go beyond regulatory

compliance and proactively ban or restrict use of harmful chemicals in their products.

There exists a fairly extensive literature on the business case for companies

preemptively adopting stronger environmental standards. (Scruggs, 2013; Fiorino and

Bhan, 2012; Russo, 1997). Key drivers for implementing sustainable chemical policies

include:

Differentiating product to create competitive advantage

Preempting competition by innovating safe chemical solutions that may later be

required by law

Managing market position by pushing competitors to adopt similar policies

Reducing liability and reputational risks

Reducing costs by implementing standards among suppliers that increase

process efficiencies

Spurring product innovation through designing safer products

Desire to raise the standard of ethical corporate behavior

As for Walmart, a company that from its very founding has relentlessly focused

on reducing costs, clearlyone motivation in implementing a green chemicals policy is to

create a platform to further drive down costs. By creating a sustainable chemical

standard among its 100,000 suppliers, Walmart is able to wield its immense market

position to reduce costs and improve efficiencies.

There is a growing regulatory policy literature on the concept of “private market

regulation”—companies exerting market leverage to manage supply chains, in effect,

5

forcing suppliers to adopt more uniform and higher standards of sourcing. (Fiorino and

Bhan, 2012)

This can be seen, for instance, at Patagonia, the outdoor apparel company, which

earlier this year began requiring suppliers to certify through chain of custody

documentation that down was not sourced from so-called “live plucked geese.”

In the case of Dell, sustainability has long been reflected in its core values and

operations. Dell was among the first U.S. electronics makers to publicly adopt a

chemicals policy restricting use of harmful chemicals in 2005. In addition, Dell was one

of the early computer manufacturers to eliminate toxic bromated flame retardants in

desktops, notebooks, and computer chassis parts in 2006. (Greiner, 2006)

Environmental and Social Responsibility

In the corporate world, there are numerous examples of companies preempting

environmental regulation to address social concerns. Blackburn cites examples such as

in the 1980s, drug maker Baxter International’s voluntary removal of hazardous

underground petroleum tanks and Toyota’s early initiatives to develop electric vehicles--

well in advance of higher emissions and mileage requirements in the U.S. (Blackburn,

2007)

Besides internal corporatefactors driving the adoption of sustainable chemical

practices, another critical factor is external social pressure. Calls for greater chemical

safety in consumer products are beginning to catch up to trends in other products.

(Greiner, 2006) In the fast food industry, concerns over rising obesity in America have

led to calls for regulation on the sale of unhealthy food like soda. And in the retail sector,

Walmart, notably, has seen concerns about the expansion of so-called big box retail

stores and the impact of job losses at local businesses constrain its expansion plans.

6

What is more, as consumers have access to ever-greater information and data on

how toxic chemicals can accumulate and become concentrated in the food chain to

levels that are toxic to humans and the environment, companies will see more insistent

public calls to remove these substances.

Companies like Dell and Walmart, being responsive to intense social concerns about

the risks of toxic chemicals, essentially have adapted their core values to follow a higher

standard of behavior. As McKinsey consultant Ian Davis points out, such social issues

are not so much tangential to companies, but fundamental. (Davis, 2005). Davis argues

that farsighted companies keenly understand the implied social contract that lies

between businesses and society, similar to Rousseau’s classic social contract that

holds that political leaders must serve the public good, lest their own legitimacy be

threatened. Likewise, for companies there is a recognition that in return for their ability

to function, so-called “license to operate,” they are subject to rules and constraints.

Davis notes some companies manage such contracts by voluntarily adopting higher

standards of corporate behavior that may exceed regulatory mandates.

7

Fig. 1 Dell Supply Chain

As large multinational firms, Walmart and Dell operate on a global footprint. Dell

manufactures most products it sells, with six manufacturing facilities in Austin, TX;

Nashville, TN Ireland, Malaysia; and, China. As a manufacturer, Dell, of course, has a

far more complex supply chain than Walmart. Working with 130 suppliers, Dell

coordinates a global production network combining in-house final assembly with

reliance on outside suppliers and design and contract manufacturers. (Kraemer, 2000).

In terms of its sustainability footprint, Walmart operates on a global scale,

operating 11,156 stores in 27 countries, with 100,000 suppliers and 158 distribution

centers.

Component Suppliers

LogisticsCompanies System

Integrators

Third-Party Hardware

and Software Suppliers

Repair and Support Vendors

DELL

Customer

Distributors

OEMs

Source: Kraemer, 2000

8

Fig. 4 Walmart Supply Chain

Source: Walmart

In implementing a sustainable chemical program, a company must first adopt a

chemicals policy, which provides the guiding framework. At the heart of a chemicals

policy is selecting a recognized regulatory standard for determining a chemical’s

harmfulness. Both Dell and Walmart have adopted the standard used by the European

Union, known as the “precautionary principal.” In essence, the principal says that if

sound scientific evidence exists that a chemical poses significant health and

environmental risks, it should be avoided—even in the absence of definitive proof of

harm. The European Union has defined significant risk as chemicals with the following

characteristics: mutagenic, carcinogenic, or reproductive toxic. Further, the EU has

defined risk as chemicals that are persistent or bioaccumulative.

Why is the regulatory standard so critical? Thereis a growing bodyof scientific

evidence that many widely used household chemicals last for decades, travel long

distances from where they originate, and concentrate in toxicity as they migrate up the

food chain (Greiner, 2006).

9

Thanks to advances in biomonitoring, research has shown that scores of toxic

substances are present in humans, from blood and breast milk to urine. The U.S.

Centers for Disuse Control has detected 212 chemicals in the blood and urine of

thousands of people tested from 1999-2004, the most extensive survey of toxic

chemicals in the body published by the federal government. (CDC, 2009) A large

number of such chemicals are toxic to the brain and nervous system, cause birth

defects or abnormal development, or cause cancer in humans. (Environmental Working

Group, 2014).

Scientists refer to this contamination by chemicals found in blood, urine, and breast

milk as a person’s body burden. As persistent chemicals remain in the body for long

periods of time, perhaps years or decades, chemicals build up in human tissue.

Chemicals that are persistent and bioaccumulative, but also toxic, are the most

damaging, such as perfluorooctane, commonly found in polishes, paints, varnishes.

(Greiner, 2006)Figure 3 shows a summary of health effects of some common toxic

chemicals.

Health Effects of Common Toxic ChemicalsFig. 3

Chemical Source Health EffectCarbon black Reinforcing agent in rubber products such

as tires and pigment in printingPossible carcinogen and mutagen (cause genetic damage)

Phthalates Soft vinyl, cosmetics Shown to cause birth defects in male reproductive organs

Mercury, Arsenic, Cadmium Mercury: canned tunaArsenic: treated lumberCadmium: household bake ware

Shown to cause developmental delays and cancer at levels found in environment

Perflourooctane Carpet protectors, plastic food wrapping Linked to cancer and birth defects

Source: Greiner, 2006

10

Corporate Regulatory Compliance

In selecting a toxic chemicals standard, Dell earns high marks for adopting REACH

(Registration Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals). Administered by the

European Union, REACH is a widely recognized as the strictest and most wide ranging

chemical regulatory regime in the world. (Fiorino and Bhan, 2012)

In short, REACH operates through promulgating chemical lists. The Substance of

High Concern List bans chemicals that have one or more of such characteristics:

carcinogenic, mutagenic, toxic reproductive, or persistent, bioaccumulative, toxic. The

Authorization List bans a chemical unless authorization has been granted for a specific

use. The Candidate List is the first step in the process of a chemical being placed on the

Authorization List. However, if the chemical is used in concentrations above 0.1%, the

company must first obtain authorization.

Dell follows best practices in maintaining a banned and restricted chemicals list

based on REACH. Suppliers are contractually prohibited from using substances on the

banned list. Restricted chemicals generally may be used in concentrations under a

threshold limit.

Another important aspect of a chemicals policy is chemical footprinting,

systematically collecting and documenting chemical ingredients of all products, materials

and feedstocksthroughout the supply chain. Dell tracks chemical ingredients by requiring

suppliers to submit a declaration of conformity for every part, detailing material and

chemical content.

Sustainability Transparency and Metrics

One criticism of Dell is their use of a declaration of conformity-- a negative disclosure

where suppliers are merely certifying the component contains no substances on the

11

restricted list. By contrast, a materials declaration, which is a positive disclosure and

higher standard, requires suppliers to detail every chemical ingredient in a component.

Though overall, Dell should be commended for its efforts to restrict some of the most

toxic substances. These include elimination of mercury in all new laptop displays with

LEDs in 2010. Dell has eliminated arsenic, commonly used in the manufacturing of

display glass, instead using arsenic-free glass in displays. The firm has made significant

strides in eliminating bromated flame retardants (BFR), which when burned produces

highly toxic pollutants. This stemmed from pressure Dell was getting from hospital,

banks, and government agencies worldwide requiring computers to be free of BFR. Also,

Dell has eliminated four classes of phthalates from all products since 2010, ahead of

likely REACH restrictions.

Walmart, which is in the beginning stages of implementing sustainable

chemicals, announced in 2014 a chemicals policy most notable for its lack of

transparency. All suppliers will be required to provide full ingredient disclosure online by

2015. Suppliers will report ingredients via an online chemical screening tool called

GreenWERKS.

In identifying harmful chemicals, Walmart has made a decision to initially target a set

of ten confidential “high-priority chemicals.” This is a restricted list, not publicly

disclosed, of chemicals that Walmart will communicate to it suppliers via GreenWERKS.

When a supplier enters a product’s ingredients in the database, they will be informed if it

contains any priority chemicals. Suppliers will be required to publicly disclose online all

priority chemicals by January 2018. (Walmart Implementation Guide for Policy on

Sustainable Chemistry in Consumables, 2014)

Walmart’s defense of the confidentiality of its chemicals list is the need to protect

confidential supplier trade information. This rationale is weak and secrecy should not

12

trump the need for public disclosure. Confidentiality concerns could be addressed by

allowing suppliers, who can substantiate a need for confidentiality, to provide a functional

description of the chemical name. That way, Walmart could require suppliers to disclose

chemical ingredients as they’re identified by GreenWERKS, rather than delay disclosure

until 2018.

Overall, in the rollout of its chemicals policy, one gets the sense that Walmart is

obsessed with secrecy around restricted lists and their disclosure. I believe this works to

undermine trust by the public and weakens credibility.

Corporate Sustainability Management Systems

In utilizing tools like GreenWERKS, Walmart is at the forefront of supply-chain

chemical-data management, enabling it to manage such critical tasks as ingredients

disclosure and calculations and chemical-specific regulatory requirements.

The Sustainability Consortium, a collaboration of consumer product companies,

of which Walmart is a member, is developing Sustainability Measurement and Reporting

Systems (SMRS) to enable the measurement and reporting of sustainability related

information associated with consumer packaged goods. The system will include

reporting on human health, climate change, resource depletion, ecosystem quality, and

social impacts. Life cycle assessment provides the basic framework for the SMRS.

(Walmart Global Responsibility Report, 2014)

13

Sustainability Metrics and Reporting

Fig. 4 Walmart Benchmarks for Evaluating Supplier Performance

Policy Element MetricsReduce volume of priority chemicals Weight volume of Walmart Priority Chemicals in

aggregate

Restrict and eliminate priority chemicals Number of UPCs with Walmart Priority Chemical(s)

Sales volume of UPCs with Walmart Priority Chemical(s)

Number of suppliers with Walmart Priority Chemical(s)

Use informed substitution GreenWERCS

Number of products formulated exclusively with DfE-approved ingredients

Source: Walmart

Walmart’s overall approach with suppliers in implementing its chemical policy is

not prescriptive. Instead, it give suppliers an expansive list of resources and tools and

states how they’ll be evaluated and a list of metrics, as noted in Figure 4. Walmart then

issues a scorecard summarizing performance. (Walmart Implementation Guide ,2014).

Walmart buyers will take into account the scorecard performance in making

procurement decisions.

As for Dell, there is little public information detailing its performance metrics in

evaluating suppliers. Dell does perform quarterly random audits of suppliers. Selected

materials are submitted to a third-party lab to test for the presence of restricted

materials. Dell will not release a part to production unless it has a declaration of

conformity document from the supplier. From time to time, Dell may request from a

supplier technical documentation to verify the declaration of conformity, such as internal

design controls or analytical test data. (Dell Chemical Use Policy, 2013)

Stakeholder Engagement and Alternative Assessment

One area where some of the most promising work on sustainable chemicals is

occurring through collaboration with stakeholders is the field of alternative-chemicals

14

assessment—evaluating and comparing properties of chemicals and identifying safer

and preferable alternatives. Alternative-chemical assessment is based on the principal

of substitution: a chemical should be substituted when a safer alternative is available.

However, there are challenges to implementing substitution. Replacing a harmful

chemical and developing an alternative can be costly and resource intensive. And most

companies are reluctant to take the risk if they’re unsure of a market for the new

product. (Chemsec, 2014)

Dell and Walmart are both involved in Design for the Environment (DfE), a

pioneering collaboration between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

businesses, research organizations, and public interest groups, aimed at lowering

barriers to substituting harmful chemicals and promoting green chemistry innovation. In

January 2014, Walmart began using DfE’s green labeling for private-label cleaning

products and plans to expand to other categories as the program grows. (Walmart

Implementation Guide for Policy on Sustainable Chemistry in Consumables, 2014)

Brand manufacturers apply for the DfE label by submitting products to DfE for

review.  Each product is evaluated against a set of health and environmental criteria--for

example, if an ingredient is associated with causing cancer or reproductive harm. In

addition, the product must meet performance standards and contain environmentally

sustainable packaging. All product ingredients must be disclosed on the package itself

or the manufacturer’s website.(Design for Environment, 2014).

15

Fig 5. Design for Environment Application Process

DfE’s methodology involves using existing primary data and predictive modeling

todetermine human health and environmental hazards of each chemical under

evaluation. Life cycle analysis is used to consider chemical hazards throughout the

manufacturing process, product use, and disposal. This includes a comprehensive

consideration of potential worker, consumer, and environmental exposure pathways.

Data sources include publicly available empirical data, data received by EPA as

confidential business information, and confidential experimental data supplied by

chemical manufacturers. (Design for Environment, 2014)

Dell is actively involved in the DfE flame retardant and printed-circuit board project.

The project stemmed from concerns that flame retardants historically used in printed

circuit board manufacturing were found to be highly toxic. Collaborating with DfE, the

electronics industry launched the project in 2006 to study the environmental and human

health impacts of new materials that can be used to meet the fire safety requirements

for circuit boards.

Source: Walmart

16

DfE is one of many chemical alternative-assessment programs in the market.

Another is GreenScreen, developed by Clean Production Action, a Boston-based

nonprofit organization that works with companies on sustainable chemical initiatives.

GreenScreen’s free tool screens and ranks chemicals and materials for environmental

and health risks. It asks users to take into consideration chemical breakdown of

products when evaluating chemicals against four benchmarks. Once a safer alternative

is identified, a plan for implementation is developed, particularly if the substitution

affects production processes or work practices.

Another area seeing progress is the development of chemical-data management

standards that enable companies to communicate chemical ingredient data up and

down the supply chain. For example, the Greener Chemicals and Processes

Information Standard provides chemical companies with a standardized format to define

and report a chemical’s risk profile and impacts. It was developed by the National

Science Foundation and the American Chemical Society through involvement of a multi-

stakeholder group of manufacturers, suppliers, regulatory agencies, customers, and

academics.

The standard includes data on:

Chemical characteristics

Human health effects

Ecological effects

Physical safety properties

Chemical processes

Chemical efficiency and waste prevention

Water

Energy

17

Biobased carbon content

Process safety

Social responsibility

Yet another field of sustainable chemicals on the technology forefront is green

chemistry. Green Chemistry and Commerce Council — a consortium of companies

including such firms as Timberland and Seventh Generation— that seeks to advance

sustainable chemicals, is currently leading an initiative to bring green chemicals into the

mainstream.

What exactly is green chemistry? It is the design, manufacture, and application of

chemical products without hazardous substances. With toxic chemicals absent from

materials, processes, and products, new markets can develop and costs associated

with toxic chemical handling like transportation, disposal and compliance reduced. The

idea is that by bringing green chemistry into the mainstream economy by making it a

standard practice, eventually all chemistry, by default, will be green chemistry (Becker

and Perlmutter, 2014). Green chemistry design criteria are embedded in product design

guidelines and at each stage of product development, so products are designed to be

green from their conception.

For example, Segetis, a small chemical producer, makes a cleaning solvent sold by

Seventh Generation made from waste wood trimmings and corn stalks. Yet despite the

launch of some high-profile products, historically green chemistry has attracted little

attention in chemicals research and product design. Among the reasons are lack of

government support and investment and few academic programs focused on research

and teaching. And because green chemistry lacks the status of, say, clean energy, it is

less likely to garner private investment.

18

Evaluations and Conclusions

Overall, it is clear that Dell and Walmart are high-profile leaders in environmental

sustainability. Both companies have channeled their zeal and commitment to

environmental stewardship to theirwork on sustainable chemistry. As well, both

companies have recognized that sustainable chemical strategies are smart business

strategies — a means of differentiating brands and products for competitive advantage,

lowering costs through standardizing supply chains processes, and enhancing customer

loyalty by raising the standard of ethical corporate behavior.

Where the companies differ is that Dell has a long track record integrating

sustainable chemicals into supply-chain management and successfully mainstreaming

the precautionary principal in its operations. Walmart, of course, is just starting out on a

sustainable chemical policy, so in many respects, the jury is still out. Nevertheless, it

has begun by adopting many best practices, most importantly, formally adopting the

precautionary principle as the foundation of its chemical policy.

Where Walmart particularly stands out is its embrace of sustainability-management

system tools like GreenWERKS and the Sustainability Index to identify, track, and report

harmful chemicals in its supply chain. Walmart’s use of these best-in-class tools could

have a cascading effect on the market, pushing suppliers to adopt similar SCMS tools,

thus having the benefit of facilitating transfer of chemical data along the supply chain.

Another area where Walmart has done well is communicating with suppliers about

implementing its sustainable chemical program throughan internal online platform called

Sustainability Hub. In its chemical policy implementation guide published on the hub,

the company provides very clear instructions to suppliers on subjects from program

goals and timelines to technical assistance resources. Another strong point: Walmart’s

19

decision to give suppliers wide of flexibility towards implementing the program, but

holding them accountable through clear metrics by which they will be measured.

In Dell’s case, there was relatively little public information describing tools and

systems for communicating with and tracking supplier performance. However, Dell

could strengthen its system for tracking supplier compliance with restricted chemical

lists by utilizing material disclosure—a far higher standard--rather than declaration of

conformity.

In the area of stakeholder engagement, both companies have done outstanding

work, particularly collaborating with other companies, government agencies, and NGOs

on such critical issues as alternative assessment and green chemistry. Here, Dell has

continued its pioneering work to eliminate the most egregious toxic chemicals from

computer parts, most notably polychloride vinyl (PVC) and bromated flame retardant.

Since 2001, Dell has been involved in the High-Density Package User Group, with Dell

leading a project in 2008 to move the electronics industry to remove halogen from

computer parts. Walmart has aggressively pursued alternative assessments, working

with such organizations as DfE to have all private -label cleaning products DfE certified.

Walmart’s chief criticism is the lack of transparency in the rollout of its restricted

chemicals list. It is striking that Walmart has refused to name chemicals on its restricted

lists—both “priority chemicals” and "high-priority chemicals.” As noted earlier, Walmart’s

claim of supplier confidentiality does not stand up to scrutiny. Because a high level of

transparency is so critical to a credible sustainability program, especially a new one, I

believe this could tarnish Walmart’s sustainable chemicals initiative as it gets off the

ground, despite the good work in other aspects of the program.

In the end, many challenges remain for companies to remove harmful chemicals

from their supply chains. And a number of those challenges are a function of the

20

market’s current lack of chemical-tracking infrastructure. As ChemSec, a sustainable

chemicals NGO, points out, “the companies closest to consumers are those most under

most pressure to screen products for toxic substances and replace them when possible.

However due to lack of resources, these are often the companies in the least favorable

position to actually do so. The chemical using companies often receive inadequate, if

any, information on the products they receive from up the supply-chain.” In addition,

smaller companies often lack the technical know-how on chemical tracking,making the

handling of hazardous substances, or even the information on these a complex

business.” (ChemSec, 2014).

Nevertheless, the fact that companies like Walmart and Dell are on the forefront

of sustainable chemistry is crucially important. Their immense size and breadth

ofoperations confer tremendous leverage in working to remove harmful chemicals in the

retail and computer sectors, as well as influencing supply chain trends in other

industries.

21

References

Blackburn, W. (2007). The Sustainability Handbook. London: Earthscan.

Bomgardner, M. M. (February 17, 2014). Walmart and target take aim at hazardous ingredients. Retrieved 10/04, 2014, from http://cen.acs.org/articles/92/i7/Walmart-Target-Take-Aim-Hazardous.html

ChemSec guiding principals. Retrieved 12/5, 2014, from http://chemsec.org/about-us/guiding-principles/substitution

Clean Production Action. GreenScreen for safer chemicals. Retrieved 12/07, 2014, from http://www.greenscreenchemicals.org/

Davis, I. (2005, 05/26/2005). The biggest contract. Economist,

Dell chemical use policy. (May 2013). Retrieved 11/16, 2014, from http://www.dell.com/learn/us/en/uscorp1/corporate~environment~en/documents~chemical-use-policy.pdf

Dell Inc. Corporate Responsibility Report. (2014). Retrieved 11/28, 2015, from http://i.dell.com/sites/doccontent/corporate/corp-comm/en/Documents/fy14-cr-report.pdf

Dell profile, Reference for Business. Retrieved 11/28, 2014, from http://www.referenceforbusiness.com/history2/68/Dell-Inc.html

Environmental Working Group. Human toxome project. Retrieved 12/5, 2014, from http://www.ewg.org/sites/humantoxome/

Fiorino, D., &Bhan, M. (2012). Environmental regulation with supply chains: Comparing private and public regulation. Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management, Draft

Greiner, T., Rossi, M., Thorpe, B., & Kerr, B. (2006). Healthy business strategies for transforming the toxic chemical economy, Clean Production Action.

Jellen, C. (2014, 2/10/2010). Product ingredients: Say can you see? Message posted to http://supply-chain-data-mgmt.blogspot.com/2010/02/product-ingredients-mustard-seed-moves.html

Kraemer, K. L., &Dedrick, J. (2000). Dell computer: Organization of a global production network. Irvine, CA: Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations, Univ. of California, Irvine.

Lavoe, E., & Heine, L. G. (2010). Chemical alternatives assessment: Enabling substitution to safer chemicals. Environmental Science & Technology, 44(24)

22

Nagappan, P. (11/10/2014). How VF corp trims harmful chemicals in its apparel supply chain. Retrieved 11/11, 2014, from http://www.greenbiz.com/article/apparel-giant-vf-corp-trims-harmful-chemical-use

Perlmutter, A., & Becker, M. (01/10/2014). Timberland, seventh generation green chemistry mainstream. Retrieved 12/7, 2014, from http://www.greenbiz.com/blog/2014/01/10/timberland-seventh-generation-take-green-chemistry-mainstream

Reed, R. (2000). Total quality managment and sustainable competitve advantage. Journal of Quality Management, 5(1), 5.

Rossi, D. M., Peele, C., & Thorpe, B. (2012). Guide for safer chemicals: Implementing BizNGO principles for safer chemicals. Somerville, MA: BizNGO/Clean Production Action.

Rossi, M. (11/18/2013). Target, walmart, whole foods leading retailers in race to safer chemicals. Retrieved 10/16, 2014, from http://www.greenbiz.com/blog/2013/11/18/target-walmart-whole-foods-cleaner-chemicals

Russo, M. V. (1997). A resource-based perspective on corporate environmental performance and profitability. Academy of Management Journal, 40(3)

Scruggs, C. E. (2013). Reducing hazardous chemicals in consumer products: Proactive company strategies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 44(0), 105-114.

U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2009). Fourth national report on human exposure to environmental chemicals. Atlanta, GA:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Design for the environment product labeling. Retrieved 12/5, 2014, from http://www.epa.gov/dfe/faqs.html

Walmart Global Responsibility Report. Retrieved 11/28, 2014, from http://cdn.corporate.walmart.com/db/e1/b551a9db42fd99ea24141f76065f/2014-global-responsibility-report.pdf

Walmart implementation guide for policy on sustainable chemistry in consumables. (02/21/2014). Retrieved 11/16/, 2014, from http://www.walmartsustainabilityhub.com/ci/fattach/get/4820/0/filename/Chemical+Policy+Implementation+Guide+-+Last+updated+19+March+2014.pdf

23