The company was set up in 2001 at the initiative of Solidaridad, a Dutch church-based development organisation to introduce organic cotton and fair trade jeans wear.(1)

Share ownership: 16% share of the company is owned by the farmers and producers of textiles through the 'Association of Kuyichi Producers'. One representative of the Association attends the annual Kuyichi shareholders meeting and through this may be able influence decisions. Factories are normally represented in the Association of Kuyichi Producers by the owner or somebody else in the management. Any dividends received by the factory must be spent on improving working conditions in the factory. Suppliers are invited to join the Association if they have been working with Kuyichi for more than one year, are SA8000 compliant and are working with organic cotton. Voting rights and distribution of dividends is based on value of goods supplied to Kuyichi. A list of Foundations and members is not available.

33% of the shares are owned by Solidaridad. 32% of shares are owned by Triodos Innovation Fund B.V. (investment fund). 9% by ICCO (Dutch NGO), 5% PPM Stimulans (investment fund) and the remaining 5% by Triodos Ventures B.V. (investment fund).

Markets: Kuyichi products are sold in the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxemburg, Sweden, Germany, Switzerland, Austria, UK, Ireland, Greece, Spain, Italy, Greenland and Chile.

Activities: Kuyichi design and import women's and men's jeans and other clothing.

Producers: At the beginning of 2008, Kuyichi had 21 suppliers. The volume of production by country is as follows: 1.8% from Hong Kong, 4.2% from India, 5.2% from the Netherlands, 8.6% from China, 13.8% from Turkey, 29.6% from Tunisia and 36.8% from Peru. The company intends to to reduce the number of suppliers to a maximum 10-15 suppliers, of which 3-4 will be key suppliers.

Producers are selected on their ability to fulfil Kuyichi's quality and quantity requirements, willingness to improve / implement social standards and implement the Track&Trace system (see below).

Standards Kuyichi is a member of Made-By, which describes itself as 'an umbrella label used by fashion brands to indicate their clothes are okay'(2). The Made-By system is based on the idea that a supplier benefits most from implementing a single standard which is accepted by all parties, including other buyers, rather than implementing multiple standards within a single factory. Made-By does not have its own set of standards that the supply chain of its member brands should comply with, but accepts the standards of WRAP, BSCI, SAI (SA8000), ETI, FWF and FLA(3). Made-By recognises the many weaknesses in these standards in a study it published in March 2008, but concludes that Social Accountability International (SA8000), FWF and ETI standards are the strongest and demands participating brands work with their suppliers towards these.

The percentage of Kuyichi's production that came from producers that were 'socially certified' went from 6% (SA8000 and BSCI certifications) in 2005 to 2% in 2006 (SA8000 certifications). It is not known why this percentage went down. In 2006, suppliers in Tunisia and Peru, just over half of Kuyichi's supply base, were working towards SA8000 cerfication. These suppliers were already monitored through the WRAP and FLA systems.

Reporting In 2006 a fifth of Kuyichi's supply chain was included in Made-By's 'Track&Trace' system(4), meaning that information about the designers, textile producers and garment manufacturers for particular products is available. Kuyichi expect to see continuous improvement in social and environmental conditions before revealing their entire supply chain.

Monitoring and verification As a member of MADE-BY, Kuyichi relies on the monitoring, verification, certification and complaints processes of ETI, BSCI, SAI (SA8000), FLA, FWF and WRAP. Therefore, if a producer has already been through the monitoring, verification or certification process, perhaps because another buyer from the factory is involved with that organisation, and is an accepted supplier, this is taken by Kuyichi to be an indication that the supplier is working towards decent working conditions. MADE-BY and Kuyichi do not audit suppliers themselves since they are not accredited or members of these organisations and do not feel it is their role to do so. It is not clear if Kuyichi have access to audit reports carried out by other companies or organisations.

A study of the different initiatives that Made-By takes into consideration in relation to its members' supply chains was published in March 2008 in an attempt to clarify confusion about its system as it currently operates and to address the multiple criticisms of BSCI, ETI, FLA, FWF, SA8000 and WRAP. For example, BSCI and WRAP are criticized for not systematically involving stakeholders, and SA8000 certification for being granted on the basis of the much-criticised social audit model, which provides a snap-shot view of factory conditions (see Looking for a Quick Fix by the Clean Clothes Campaign at http://www.cleanclothes.org/publications/quick_fix.htm for a comprehensive analysis of monitoring, verification and certification systems). The Made-By study sets out its policy for comparing the different initiatives and concludes that SA8000, ETI and FairWear Foundation have the best standards and monitoring, verification or certification systems.

Similar to many brands, Kuyichi does not pay for monitoring of suppliers, verification of code implementation, remediation or training of supplier staff and workers on the code of conduct. In some cases MADE-BY is able to (partly) finance the monitoring or certification process including remediation and the training of management and workers. Verification is always paid for by the supplier and is always carried out by a multi-stakeholder initiative or authorised certification body.

When sourcing from suppliers located in countries/zones where freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining are restricted by law, Kuyichi supports the set-up of worker training programmes and worker committees within the framework offered by FWF, ETI and SA8000.

When non-compliances are detected, a corrective action plan is always developed in an attempt to improve the situation. The corrective action plan is handled by the auditor, consultant or factory itself, depending on the situation. If a factory is unwilling to cooperate and the issues not handled well and are serious a relationship can be ended. It is unknown how many corrective action plans have been developed. Kuyichi drafts an action plan with MADE-BY twice a year.

Comments and questions Kuyichi volunteered information relating to a large number of questions relating to workers' rights policies, beyond those asked of other companies, yet Kuyichi's responses were frustrating because of the lack of clarity of the Made-By system. The Made By study on social standards, published in March 2008, gives some clarification about their choice of standards and systems for monitoring, certification and verification, yet does not really address how the system works in practice.

On the positive side, by participating in the Made-By system, Kuyichi is not creating yet another code of conduct or system for monitoring or verification, but instead offers suppliers the opportunity to use monitoring, certification, verification and complaints procedures that already exist.

A downside of this approach, is that this system can only be as good as the standards it is using. SAI, ETI, FLA, FWF, WRAP and BSCI vary tremendously in function (certification, developing best practice, verification, monitoring etc) and member-company commitment, standards and stakeholder involvement(5). Despite acknowledging the many flaws of these, and its demand that member brands work towards the best available standards (SA8000, ETI, FWF), Made-By members' suppliers may be monitored, verified or certified according to any of standards and systems. By relying on these existing initiatives, and accepting WRAP, BSCI and SA8000 in particular, Kuyichi is not going beyond what major brands and retailers are doing to address workers' rights standards.

Kuyichi say they encourage the involvement of trade unions in monitoring and verification, but were unable to state that this always happens. Given that this is rare in any of the initiatives they claim to support and that Kuyichi don't pay for any monitoring themselves it would seem unlikely that this takes place in any systematic way.

The 'Track&Trace' system is good in principle: it goes beyond simply the names of production facilities by providing consumers with information about the suppliers and also identifying precisely which manufacturer was involved in making their garment. It would be more convincing if all Kuyichi's suppliers were listed and if Kuyichi had a clearer system for ensuring that workers' rights were respected.

Overall, Kuyichi appear to have put thought into setting up a company along the lines of fair trade companies, with shareholders who would appear to have an interest in more than just profit. Yet, their systems are no more robust than any number of mainstream brands, and given they don't actually monitor, audit or cover any costs of remediation themselves, in many ways are playing a less active role than some of the more progressive brands.