City’s new green procurement strategy could mean red tape
Companies will have to jump through a lot of hoops to build Edmonton a few bike racks
The City of Edmonton is buying 120 new bike racks, but it doesn’t want just any old bike racks.
It wants special, environmentally friendly bike racks, preferably made with recycled material and renewable energy, and it’s willing to go to great lengths to get them.
To win the contract, companies are asked to jump through numerous environmental hoops. For example, each manufacturer is asked to spell out its sustainability policy.
Manufacturers are also asked to explain in detail if they use sustainability criteria in picking their own business partners and suppliers.
In regards to the bike racks, the city prefers manufacturers to meet the following criteria:
“No components that are derived from the Earth’s crust (e.g. petrochemicals and metals), unless those ingredients are 100 per cent captured and reused. No components that are persistent in nature (e.g. plastic), unless those substances are 100 per cent captured and reused. And a production process that: does not contribute to the increased concentrations of substances from the Earth’s crust or the buildup of persistent compounds in nature, uses only sustainable, renewable energy or energy produced in a carbon-neutral manner; does not rely on practices that systematically, physically degrade land and ecosystems; and does not rely on practices that undermine people’s capacity to meet their basic needs.”
What to make of this purchasing process? I favour a society that is prosperous, but also an effective steward of the environment. That means green policies that work and don’t create troubles and inefficiencies of their own. I’m not sure the bike-rack tender meets that test.
To start, how will city officials know if some seemingly green dream of a supplier in California or China is telling the truth about its greenness? How will officials verify they’re using wind power, not coal?
And isn’t this an awful lot of extra paperwork on all sides for what could well be empty promises?
And just what exactly could a bike-rack manufacturer possibly do to “undermine people’s capacity to meet their basic needs?”
It had never before occurred to me bike-rack manufacturers might be capable of such nasty undermining endeavours.
For answers, I start with Coun. Michael Oshry, who is also a successful businessman.
Oshry wonders about the amount of paperwork and reporting being required here and whether the extra work could drive away companies with good products.
“It seems to be pretty excessive for something that’s an infrastructure tender,” he said.
“There’s no way the city is going to get the best bang for the buck by having the tender written like that. It’s unlikely because all the stuff they’re asking for is more expensive, I would think.”
As for asking about the green record of a manufacturer’s business partners, Oshry says the city can focus on its own environmental practices, but shouldn’t push that agenda on others.
“Private companies shouldn’t be socially engineered by bureaucrats.”
There are expectations on all suppliers to be environmentally sustainable, said Roxanne Kits, the city’s branch manager of corporate procurement. But this additional “sustainability questionnaire” for the bike-rack tender is new and is only used on a few projects.
Getting the best value in terms of quality and price is always the most important thing, Kits said. In this case, however, cycling is seen as an environmentally friendly activity, so that’s likely why the questionnaire was part of the tender.
University of Alberta business professor Joel Gehman applauds the city’s approach on the bikerack tender, saying: “I think this is fantastic ... It’s one way for the city to put its money where its mouth is in terms of its sustainability commitments.”
Many businesses and organizations thinking of becoming more sustainable are updating procurement practices, Gehman said. Many businesses will have ready answers to these kinds of questions.
The environmental aspect is also just one small piece in the final criteria, Gehman said, and it’s good for the city to explore if this approach works on a few smaller projects.
“It’s low stakes so they can try it out and the city can figure out for themselves if it’s a waste of our time or, is it a really useful effort?”
I agree with Gehman on this final point. It’s good to explore new things and it’s also good this bike-rack purchase is a lowstakes matter.
That said, the city has had all kinds of problems getting the job done well and on time on major projects. It’s hard to see how adding a layer of green tape to purchasing decisions will speed things up or control costs.