ECO1 Cost of distribution (C 1.4.2)

ECO2 Net Income (C 1.4.1)

ECO3 Stability of Supplier Relationships (C 2.2.2)

ECO4 Local Procurement (C 4.2.1)

ECO5 Price determination (C 1.4.3)

ENV1 Locally adapted variaties and breeds (E 4.3.3)

ENV2 Intensity of Material Use (E 5.1.4)

ENV3 Energy Consumption (E 5.2.3)

ENV4 Water conservation practices (E 2.1.2)

ENV5 Food Loss and Waste Reduction (E 5.3.4)

SOC1 Employment Relations (S 3.1.1)

SOC2 Gender Equality (S 4.2.1)

SOC3 Rights of Suppliers (S 2.2.1)

SOC4 Fair Pricing and transparent contracts (S 2.1.1)

SOC5 Safety of Workplace, Operations and Facilities (S 5.1.2)

GOV1 Transparency (G 2.3.1)

GOV2 Stakeholder Engagement (G 3.1.2)

GOV3 Engagement Barriers (G 3.1.3)

GOV4 Effective Participation (G 3.1.4)

GOV5 Civic Responsibility (G 4.3.1)

ALT1 Wholesaler

ALT2 Direct Sales

ALT3 e commerce

ALT4 Small retailer

ALT5 Supermarkets

ALT6 Industry

ALT7 Restaurants

ALT8 Cooperatives

Total revenue earned by distribution channel

The amplitude of the mark-up (i.e. the difference between the selling price and the cost per unit of production)

Practices that aim at saving water in agriculture chains

Well-paid employment, working conditions

Famale workers presence

Economic or accounting indicator that refers to the costs related to the distribution channel: Energy, water, labor costs,

packaging

This indicator measures the share of supplier contracts/business relationship that has remained ongoing over the last 5

years, or since the enterprise is in business for a period of less than five years.

This indicator measures whether the enterprise has purchased its inputs/ingredients/products from local suppliers when

equal or similar conditions exist, in comparison to non-local suppliers.

Determine what is the share of production (by area, animal number of live weight) accounted for by: locally adapted plant

varieties or animal breeds; rare; and traditional (heirloom) crop varieties and livestock breeds.

The replacement of virgin non-renewable materials by recycled and renewable materials and the reduction of the material

intensity of production (i.e. increased eco-efficiency) are two central pillars of a green economy.

This indicator measures how has the enterprise’ direct energy consumption per unit of produce changed during the past

five years.

The topic of this indicator relates to food losses that occur during production, post-harvest and processing operations, as

well as food waste that occurs at different distribution channels

Suppliers, particularly primary producers, rights to freedom of association and collective bargaining are basic freedoms

that form the necessary basis and prerequisite conditions for fair trading with buyers. This indicator refers to buyers

treating the primary producers who supply them with farm products with respect, as well as other suppliers such as

processors and other businesses.

For sustained trading relationships to exist, buyers must pay primary producers prices for their products that reflect the

real cost of the entire process of sustaining a regenerative ecological system. This includes supporting a decent livelihood

for primary producers, their families and workers by providing living wages that cover producer’s costs

This qualitative indicator measures whether the enterprise has been ensuring a safe, clean and healthy workplace for

employees by determining if facilities and structures, equipment, practices, and food offered are safe and meet employee

needs for healthy lifestyles.

Real transparency involves understanding the information needs of stakeholders and making accurate, timely and relevant

information available in an accessible way.

The enterprise is able to effectively engage with stakeholders. Excellent performance in this indicator will be evidenced by

engagement activities customized for stakeholder type, resulting in comprehensive and mutually satisfactory engagement

which is sustained over time

The enterprise has an understanding of how asymmetries of power can prevent the engagement of vulnerable

stakeholders. It has a commitment to identifying barriers to engagement for all stakeholder groups and working with those

groups to overcome barriers. Barriers can include but are not limited to knowledge/information, financial, physical,

geographic, cultural, religious, linguistic/communication and status barrier

Any enterprise which has genuinely engaged its stakeholders should be able to show the effect of this engagement on the

enterprise’s decisions and actions

This is achieved when all parts of the supply chain are free from exploitation of individuals, communities and the

environment across all four dimensions of sustainability.

Lower cost of production is more economically sustainable

Higher net income is more economically sustainable

Higher Local procurement is more economically sustainable

Higher share of local variety is more environmentally sustainable

Lower energy consumption is more environmentally sustainable

Better working conditions is more socially sustainable

Better gender equality is more socially sustainable

Fair contracts is more socially sustainable

Higher stability of supplier relationship is more economically

sustainable

Higher Percentage of the selling price compared to the

conventional counterpart (conventional wholsesaler)

Higher share of recycled or renewable material or with less

material use is more environmentally sustainable

Lower water intensity consumption is more environmentally

sustainable

Lower product loss in the analysed supply chain is more

environmentally sustainable

Better rights, freedom of associations and collective bargaining

is more socially sustainable

Low engagment barriers is more governance sustainable

Higher civic responsability is more governance sustainable

Better safe, clean and helathy workspace is more socially

sustainable

Higher information transparency across stakeholders is more

governance sustainable

Higher engagement of stakeholder is more governance

sustainable

Higher effective stakeholders participation is more governance

sustainable

1=The two indicators have the SAME importance

2=The selected indicator has an importance between 1 and 3 against the compared one

3=The selected indicator has a SLIGHT importance against the compared one

4=The selected indicator has an importance between 3 and 5 against the compared one

5=The selected indicator has a MODERATE importance against the compared one

6=The selected indicator has an importance between 5 and 7 against the compared one

7=The selected indicator has a STRONG importance against the compared one

8=The selected indicator has an importance between 7 and 9 against the compared one

9=The selected indicator has a VERY STRONG importance against the compared one

ECO1 Cost of distribution (C 1.4.2)

ECO2 Net Income (C 1.4.1)

ECO3 Stability of Supplier Relationships (C 2.2.2)

ECO4 Local Procurement (C 4.2.1)

ECO5 Price determination (C 1.4.3)

ECONOMIC

ECO1 ECO2 ECO1 ECO3 ECO1 ECO4 ECO1

1 1 4 9 4

      

ECO1 ECO2 ECO3 ECO4 ECO5

ECO1     

ECO2     

ECO3     

ECO4     

ECO5     

    