Scoring Supermarkets

Scorecard Results

Big C
-
-
1
-
CP Freshmart
1
4
3
-
Foodland
-
-
-
-
Gourmet Market
-
-
-
-
Makro
3
2
3
-
Tesco**
7
10
3.5
1
Villa Market
-
-
-
-
Tops
-
-
-
-
Big C
-
-
1
-
CP Freshmart
2
6
3
-
Foodland
-
-
-
-
Gourmet Market
-
-
-
-
Makro
3
3
4
-
Tesco**
10
14
5
6
Villa Market
-
-
-
-
Tops
-
-
-
1

Total Score

Makro
9
5
1
3
Tops Market
9
4
0
5
CP Freshmart
9
3
1
5
Tesco
3
0
0.33
3
Gourmet Market
2
0
0
2
Big C
0
0
0
0
Villa Market
0
0
0
0
Foodland
0
0
0
0
 

Average

4.04
1.50
0.29
2.25
Big C
-
-
-
-
CP Freshmart
-
-
-
-
Foodland
-
-
-
-
Gourmet Market
-
-
-
-
Makro
-
-
-
-
Tesco**
-
-
-
-
Villa Market
-
-
-
-
Tops
-
-
-
-

Remark

*Policies of the parent companies have also been taken into consideration when doing the analysis of retail companies.
**In our assessment for Tesco’s policies, policies of Tesco PLC in the United Kingdom were also taken into consideration. However, if we consider only information and public policies of Tesco Lotus in Thailand alone, the total score will decrease.

What is our
Scorecard?

The framework for the assessment of public policies in supermarkets in Thailand consists of four different dimensions which are transparency and responsibility, workers, small-scale farmers, and women. They are considered essential elements in the transparent and fair food supply chain. Each dimension has eight key indicators (except the women dimension which has only seven) and each indicator also has three sub-indicators. When combining, the total points of the scorecard is at 93.

When evaluating, only company’s policies which are publicly-disclosed information or come from valid sources (e.g. corporate website, annual report, corporate sustainability and governance report, employee’s code of conduct, and purchasing policies that are published on the website) are considered. The evaluation will be examined based on practical policies, projects, and positive outcomes that affect related parties especially workers, small-scale farmers, and women.

This policy assessment is not intended either directly or indirectly to compare, persuade, or indicate that one company is better than another in terms of business or commercial purposes, as well as not aiming to compare or analyze information in terms of quality and safety of the products, services, and other issues, or persuading customers to give or not to give support for each supermarket. The assessment only aims to reflect on the supermarket’s policies, practices, and good initiatives that are relevant to transparency and responsibility, workers, small-scale workers, and women in the food supply chain. It is a constructive feedback given without any attempt to oppose the company which does not establish good practices or the ones which have the insufficiently developed practices.

WHY ARE WE
CAMPAIGNING FOR CHANGE?

Everyone has the right to clean food. We need to ensure that the produce that people consume is safe for human consumption and that harmful agricultural practices are phased out to help protect workers and the environment. 

Write a letter
to supermarkets

Tell the supermarkets how you feel. Is it good that some of the food on their shelves is not safe to eat, yet they continue to sell it?

    Sign
    the petition

    Our goal is to get to 20,000 signatures. We believe with 20,000 supporters in Thailand, we can tell the supermarkets that your customers have spoken!

    Be part of this positive change, bringing fairness and transparency to the food supply chain, and improve the lives of the Thai people.

    .