ECOVADIS SUSTAINABLE PROCUREMENT
Chemical companies preparing for an EcoVadis assessment should be able to show how environmental and social considerations influence their purchasing decisions. Useful evidence connects supplier requirements with risk screening, assessments, follow-up actions and measurable coverage.
For manufacturers, formulators and distributors, this means checking what existing supplier files actually demonstrate. A safety data sheet, a signed supplier code and an audit report each serve different purposes. Their value depends on the question being answered and how they connect to the company's procurement practices.
This article draws on the CRAC China 2026 presentation by Richard Bourne, EcoVadis's Senior Vice President of Sales for Asia-Pacific, and Michelle Xu, Key Account Manager, alongside EcoVadis's official guidance. Their discussion highlighted the importance of integrating supplier sustainability information into purchasing processes and sustained supplier engagement. REACH24H develops those themes into practical evidence checks for chemical companies.
Quick Navigation
Jump to the key sections of this article.
Sustainable Procurement Remains a Chemical Industry Improvement Priority
The chemical industry analysis covered 7,477 rated chemical companies worldwide, including 1,683 in China, or 22.5% of the sample. Across the global chemical industry dataset, Sustainable Procurement averaged 45.3 points, compared with 59.2 for Environment, 56.3 for Labor & Human Rights and 49.8 for Ethics. Sustainable Procurement also recorded the largest average improvement per reassessment, at 4.6 points.
The analysis covered ISIC categories 201, 202 and 203 over 2020–2025. Theme averages were based on 17,277 assessments, while improvement figures drew on 12,518 reassessments. These are findings from the assessed chemical industry sample, rather than China-only results or estimates for the entire industry.
For chemical manufacturers, formulators and distributors, these findings provide a starting point for reviewing supplier management. Use your company's questionnaire and scorecard to assess whether supplier risk screening, purchasing controls and corrective-action follow-up are established and implemented. Organise supporting records and address the gaps identified through ongoing improvements.
What Does EcoVadis Sustainable Procurement Assess?
EcoVadis evaluates the quality of a company's sustainability management system through Policies, Actions and Results. Its assessment is tailored to the company's activities, size and operating locations, so chemical businesses should start with their assigned questionnaire rather than another company's document list. See EcoVadis's explanation of its methodology.
A chemical company can occupy two roles simultaneously:
As a supplier, it provides information about its own practices to customers.
As a buyer, it manages sustainability risks associated with its upstream suppliers and purchasing activities.
The Sustainable Procurement theme focuses attention on that second role. Preparing information for a customer's assessment does not, by itself, demonstrate how the company evaluates and manages its own suppliers.
For practical preparation, ask: Can we follow a sustainability concern from identification through to a purchasing decision, corrective action or documented review?
Procurement policies and implementation records should explain how each step is carried out, who is responsible and what results it produces.
Where that connection is unclear, REACH24H's EcoVadis assessment and evidence preparation services can help identify gaps between existing practices, supporting records and questionnaire responses.
Build a Procurement Evidence Map
Start with the claims your company intends to make. For each claim, identify the governing requirement, the record of implementation and the evidence of coverage or outcome.
The following matrix is a suggested internal review framework, not a universal EcoVadis upload list.
| Procurement activity | Records to review | What the evidence should help establish |
|---|---|---|
| Communicating supplier expectations | Procurement policy, supplier code, communication and acknowledgement records | Which requirements were communicated, to whom and when |
| Screening sustainability risks | Screening methodology, supplier and site information, completed risk reviews | How environmental and social risks were identified and prioritised |
| Assessing suppliers | Completed questionnaires, assessment findings, relevant audit reports and internal reviews | Which suppliers were assessed and how findings were evaluated |
| Making purchasing decisions | Approval records, onboarding conditions, escalation decisions and renewal reviews | How sustainability findings influenced the decision |
| Following up on weaknesses | Corrective action requests, responsibilities, deadlines and verification records | What changed, what remains open and who reviewed the response |
| Building procurement capability | Buyer training content, attendance or completion records and relevant responsibilities | Whether purchasing staff received training applicable to their work |
| Reporting performance | Supplier registers, purchasing data, KPI definitions and reporting records | The extent of implementation and the basis for reported results |
A policy establishes expectations. A completed review records an action. A purchasing decision or verified corrective action shows what happened next. Keeping those records connected makes the company's practices easier to explain.
Evaluate the Evidence in Chemical Supplier Files
Chemical supply chains generate substantial technical documentation. The preparation task is to determine how that information supports the specific sustainability claim being made.
SDS and product compliance declarations
An SDS or product compliance declaration may inform a review of a purchased material. On its own, it does not demonstrate how the buyer assessed the supplier's environmental and social practices.
If the company uses chemical hazard information when screening suppliers, retain the assessment procedure and completed review showing how that information affected the risk decision. Clarify what additional information was considered and how unresolved questions were handled.
Supplier certificates and audit reports
When reviewing supplier certificates and audit reports, check the legal entity, site, activities, dates and subject matter covered by each document.
For example, a certificate covering one manufacturing site should not automatically be treated as evidence covering every site used to fulfil orders. Similarly, a product-quality audit may leave environmental or labour questions unanswered.
The useful follow-up question is: what did the procurement team review, and what did it conclude about the supplier relationship?
Supplier codes and contractual commitments
A supplier code sets expectations. To understand its implementation, review how it was distributed, acknowledged and incorporated into supplier management.
If the business reports broad coverage, verify that acknowledgement records can be linked to the supplier register used to calculate that coverage. A collection of signed documents without a defined supplier population may be difficult to reconcile.
Carbon and other product-level data
Product carbon footprint information can support a specific purchasing objective, such as comparing available emissions data or engaging suppliers on reductions. Record the product, production location, reporting period and methodological boundaries associated with the data.
Treat that information according to what it demonstrates. A product-level carbon calculation does not establish the supplier's performance across every sustainability topic.
Keep Supplier, Manufacturer and Site Identities Connected
For chemical distributors and formulators, the invoicing supplier may differ from the manufacturer or production site described in a supporting document.
A useful internal supplier record can distinguish:
The contracted supplier and its legal identity.
The manufacturer and production site, where known and relevant.
The materials or services purchased.
The entities and activities covered by available assessments or certificates.
Information gaps and the person responsible for resolving them.
This helps prevent a common reasoning error: applying evidence from one entity or site to a different commercial relationship without explaining the connection.
Risk reviews should also consider the purchasing categories relevant to the business. Depending on operations, these may include raw materials, toll manufacturing, packaging, transport, warehousing or waste services. The scope should follow the company's actual activities and risk assessment.
Example: Reviewing a Solvent Supplier
The following hypothetical example illustrates an internal review approach. It is not a client case or an official scoring scenario.
A coatings manufacturer purchases solvent through a distributor. Its supplier file contains an SDS, a signed code of conduct and an environmental management certificate issued to a manufacturing site.
The procurement team should first establish whether the certificate covers the site supplying the solvent. It should then review the distributor and manufacturer information against the company's defined environmental and social risk criteria.
Suppose the review identifies incomplete information about the relevant site's waste management practices. The resulting record should explain:
What information is missing and why it matters.
What clarification or assessment is requested.
Who owns the follow-up and its deadline.
How the unresolved issue affects the purchasing decision.
What evidence is needed before the issue can be closed.
If additional information resolves the concern, record the review and conclusion. If it remains unresolved, retain the escalation decision and any purchasing conditions.
The resulting file allows another reviewer to understand the decision, rather than simply confirm that documents were collected.
Define Procurement KPIs Before Reporting Them
An individual supplier file shows how the management process works in practice. To demonstrate how widely those measures are implemented, consolidate data on supplier assessments, corrective actions and their results.
A statement such as "80% of suppliers were assessed" leaves several questions unanswered: which suppliers, during what period, against which criteria, and using what assessment method?
REACH24H recommends defining the population and calculation before extracting the data. Useful internal measures may include the following, where relevant to the company's programme and questionnaire.
| Illustrative measure | Calculation to define | Important boundary |
|---|---|---|
| Supplier assessment coverage | Assessed suppliers ÷ suppliers in the defined population | Distinguish sustainability assessments from quality-only reviews |
| Spend coverage | Purchasing spend with assessed suppliers ÷ purchasing spend in scope | State the period, entities and purchasing categories included |
| High-risk supplier follow-up | High-risk suppliers with documented follow-up ÷ high-risk suppliers requiring follow-up | Define both "high risk" and qualifying follow-up |
| On-time corrective action closure | Actions due in the period and verified as closed by their deadline ÷ all actions due in the period | Use the same population in both parts of the calculation and define verification requirements |
These measures answer different questions. A business may cover most of its purchasing spend while assessing only a small share of its suppliers. Reporting both can make that distinction visible.
Illustrative calculation: assessing 40 of 100 active suppliers gives 40% coverage by supplier count. If those suppliers account for €8 million of €10 million in purchasing spend, spend coverage is 80%. Neither figure should be presented without its denominator.
For quantitative targets, check the applicable methodology as well. EcoVadis's Q3 2026 methodology update states that, for questionnaires submitted on or after 14 October 2026, quantitative targets under Policy questions must include a baseline year, alongside a target year and value.
An internally defined procurement target could therefore specify an increase in assessment coverage from a documented 2025 baseline to a stated percentage by 2027, while retaining the same scope and calculation method.
Use Supplier Assessments to Drive Follow-Up
For companies participating in chemical industry supply chains, Together for Sustainability (TfS) provides a relevant example of how assessment connects with improvement.
TfS assessments are conducted by EcoVadis. TfS describes corrective action plans as a means of addressing identified weaknesses through agreed actions, deadlines and responsibilities.
When using an upstream supplier's scorecard, document the company's own review: which findings matter to the purchasing relationship, what follow-up is proportionate and when performance will be reconsidered.
Bourne and Xu emphasised sustained supplier engagement and the integration of ESG data into sourcing, supplier relationship management and risk workflows. For procurement teams, that means using assessment findings to guide follow-up and retaining a record of the decisions and actions taken.
Separate Missing Records from Missing Practices
After reviewing procurement processes, supporting documents and performance indicators, determine whether the remaining gaps concern records of existing practices or management activities that have yet to be implemented. This distinction helps the team decide what to do next.
A practice exists, but its records are scattered. Identify the responsible colleagues, locate the underlying records and explain how they relate to the assessment scope.
A practice has not been implemented. Establish an appropriate process, assign responsibility and retain evidence as it operates. A newly written procedure should not be presented as proof of earlier implementation.
EcoVadis's supporting-document guidance requires relevant evidence of the company's management system and excludes documents created solely to satisfy its questionnaire.
For the final review, give each proposed response an evidence owner. Check that the document supports the actual claim, covers the relevant entity and activities, and clearly identifies its date or reporting period.
Achieve Your EcoVadis Goals with REACH24H
REACH24H has helped numerous chemical companies earn EcoVadis Platinum, Gold, Silver and Bronze medals, with successful outcomes across all four medal levels. As an Accredited EcoVadis Consulting Partner, we bring chemical industry knowledge and assessment experience to help businesses turn sustainability ambitions into focused improvement plans.
Our approach reflects your industry classification, company size, operations, current performance and target medal level. Through gap analysis, evidence review, supplier management improvements and scorecard-based action planning, we help your team identify priorities and demonstrate implemented practices. For sustainable procurement, this means connecting supplier requirements, risk assessments, purchasing decisions and corrective actions with credible evidence and measurable results.
Whether preparing for a first assessment or targeting a higher medal, our EcoVadis consulting services help you work towards your goals while building stronger sustainability management practices. These improvements can support customer confidence, help you respond to supplier qualification requirements and strengthen your position in global chemical supply chains.
Discuss your EcoVadis goals with REACH24H.
Connect your supplier management practices with the evidence needed for your next EcoVadis assessment. Our team can help review procurement evidence gaps and prioritise improvements.
Recommended Reading
EcoVadis Industry and Company Size Explained: How Classification Impacts Your Rating
How to Improve Your EcoVadis Rating in a More Competitive Scoring System
