The Chemical Challenge Gap Analysis has been developed by GoodElectronics and ICRT. On this page you can find more information about our methodology.
GoodElectronics and ICRT contacted EICC to assess whether the EICC Code of Conduct and VAP Protocol are actually in line with the standards and recommendations formulated by GoodElectronics and ICRT in ‘Meeting the Challenge’.
Aggregated response
To this end, a ‘gap analysis’ was developed, comparing the standards formulated in Meeting the Challenge with the standards contained in the EICC Code of Conduct and the VAP Protocol. EICC kindly collaborated with this exercise. GoodElectronics and ICRT appreciate the commitment shown by EICC to this important topic.
In an earlier stage, GoodElectronics and ICRT sent out a survey to electronics companies requesting them to reflect upon their policies and practices regarding the use of process chemicals. However, none of the electronics companies contacted was willing to respond on an individual basis. Not a single company filled out the survey. Instead companies referred researchers to the EICC to give an aggregated response.
Scoring the gap analysis
This gap analysis includes two different assessments:
- The EICC compared its Code of Conduct and VAP Protocol with the standards formulated by GoodElectronics and ICRT in ‘Meeting the Challenge’.
- GoodElectronics and ICRT then assessed and compared the EICC Code and VAP Protocol to the standards and priorities we have set.
In the Chemical Challenge Gap Analysis we present both the EICC assessment and the GoodElectronics/ICRT assessment. Click on the scores for more details on the gaps between industry bar and standards set by CSOs and experts.
The EICC score reflects their self-assessment comparing the EICC Code of Conduct and the VAP Protocol to the recommendations formulated by GoodElectronics and ICRT in ‘Meeting the Challenge’.
The CSO score expresses how GoodElectronics, ICRT and experts assess the robustness of the same EICC Code of Conduct and the VAP Protocol requirements as compared to ‘Meeting the Challenge’.
In this way, the scores are an expression of the respective weight given to a particular aspect by EICC, and by GoodElectronics and ICRT respectively.
Conclusion
While there is some agreement between the parties on the extent of the gaps, there are also considerable differences between the goals set by GoodElectronics and ICRT and the industry’s self-assessment. In most cases, EICC paints a rosier picture of where the industry stands compared to the NGO benchmark, based on the GoodElectronics and ICRT assessment.