# Assessing the Degree of Sustainability Integration in Canadian Public Sector Procurement
## 3 Methodology
### Significance of Sustainability Integration  
In order to assess the significance of sustainability integration, we wanted to determine the degree to which sustainability was a consideration within the bidder selection process. As such, we looked at both inclusion and weighting of sustainability considerations. We designed a measurement scheme (see Figure 1) with four distinct levels, ranging from inclusion of any environmental or social considerations to inclusion of such considerations as independent elements within the evaluation criteria combined with clarity around mechanisms for accountability to the criteria. It is important to note that 70% of the RFPs we reviewed had weights allocated to areas of importance within the evaluation section, while 30% of RFPs outlined areas of importance but had no allocation of weights to specific areas. The bottom tier (Tier 1) encompasses RFPs that include any basic language relating to environmental and social sustainability considerations. This can range from expectations such as compliance with existing regulatory requirements (e.g., fair hiring practices for people with disabilities as per the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) or reference to existing organizational policies, to language that is assumed to be part of the functional requirements of the task (e.g., disposal and cleanup of a construction site once work has been completed). Given the sparseness of sustainability language within the RFPs and that even some mention of regulatory requirements can lead to minimal awareness of sustainability concerns, we elected to include mention of sustainability-related regulatory requirements in Tier 1. Tier 2 includes all RFPs where the sustainability considerations are included directly into the evaluation system in any category. Categories of inclusion range from technical, health, and safety, as well as value add, to an independent sustainability category. It is important to note that the significance of sustainability considerations continues to be minimal within this tier. For greater perspective, an example of sustainability inclusion is provided in Figure 2. This municipal RFP for IT print services limits sustainability consideration to environmentally-friendly disposal worth 2 points. While this RFP would be categorized into the second tier, a weighting of 2% is negligible. In addition, there are no considerations of materials, carbon impacts, or energy on the environmental side, nor any social considerations, making sustainability integration superficial and narrow, to say the least. Figure 1: Model of sustainability integration. As we move into Tier 3, we start to see mechanisms that begin to more meaningfully factor sustainability into the evaluation process, either through points or through the written requirements. The RFPs included in this tier are those where sustainability is being considered as a separate component within the evaluation. For example, a municipal IT RFP, depicted in Figure 3, for the supply of smartphones in the cellular category has separate point criteria for sustainability weighed at 5 points. Under the evaluation categories, they have listed specific impact areas to evaluate. It is important to note that significant gaps still exist. Firstly, the weighting of 5% continues to make sustainability efforts inconsequential. Secondly, while the considerations listed are important, the requests pertain to the producer of goods and do not specifically address material impacts nor the use phase of the products. Material impact areas for cellular devices are outlined by the Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool (EFEAT), and include energy use, use of chemicals and plastic materials, and end of life management [27]. Finally, the broad nature of information requested does not enable meaningful comparison across suppliers. Thus, the integration of sustainability within this RFP continues to be superficial in nature despite having a separate sustainability category.