Showing posts with label sweatshop. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sweatshop. Show all posts

Friday, 18 December 2015

promoting bad against good

There is a pattern, which sometimes happens by chance.

Ethical Fashion Forum finds a UK business that is close to collapse, ignores it and loudly promotes the competition from bad countries

Robbing in a hospital is one way to describe it.
  • Remploy

    Ethical Fashion Forum promoted a firm like Remploy in Bangladesh but were silent about Remploy in the UK closing down. Ethical Fashion Forum had got their hands on money for training small business owners the year before, running seminars in Newham College, so they ought to have known what advice to give to business owners about where to get clothes made in the UK - including Remploy. Otherwise, I think the people who paid taxes via London Development Agency for the training seminars should get their money back.
  • Equity Shoes

    Ethical Fashion Forum ran a public-funded set of training lectures about buying from Co-ops, but left-out Equity Shoes, the large hundred-year-old shoemaking co-op in Leicester that went bust the same year. Oddly enough, a Leicester MP was minister at the Department for Business at the time, which gave grants to overseas visitors to London Fashion Week and so can influence what goes on show. That year I think it was Terra Plana footwear made in China and shown in the Estethica room, which is meant to sound a bit like "ethical" I suppose. The MP signed-off the grant payments without knowing or caring. Oh and one of the speakers was Ben Ramsden of Pants to Poverty who's Pi Foundation claimed to promote worker-owned manufacturing.
  • JJ Blackledge

    wallet manufacturers in Manchester. This firm that made flat goods for the corporate gift market went bust the same weekend that Ethical Fashion Forum spoke at a public-funded seminar called "Making it Ethically in China", which was held a mile or two away in Manchester.
  • James Grove Buttons

    About the time this Birmingham factory went bust, and someone was trying to set-up a smaller company with the same tools called Grove Pattern Buttons (hornbuttons.co.uk), Ethical Fashion Forum advertised a member on their mailing list. That ethical claim of this "fellowship 500" member was that these are (1) "locally sourced buttons" from (2) "the poorest areas of the local Panama community". "Locally sourced" is a stylish bit of cheek as an ethical claim, a bit like "nutricious food" - something McDonalds claimed could mean anything but water. The buttons are sold by Miami company and sourced in Panama, according to Ethical Fashion Forum, but when emailed the suppliers say it might be Equador; they're not quite sure. They are sure that they're harvested by low-paid artizans, which follows if you buy from countries without a welfare state and pay as little as you can - even though Panama is a wealthy 100 year-old stable country quite capable of sorting-out poverty if their government wanted to. The third ethical claim - (3) is "100% eco-friendly and sustanable", but I guess that's before airmail. One final thing to say: the american buttons were something I'd rather wear, made out of large nuts, but maybe the machines are the same whatever the material.
There is a history to this. The Make Poverty History campaign was run by establishment groups with help from government ministries, to promote a big vague consensus within which opposite ideas could exist - with examples from George Monbiot in his "Africa's new best friends" article. He could have mentioned that the same vague consensus wants to wipe out manufacturing that bears the cost of a welfare state, but that's another hidden contradiction in the EFF lobby group that got so much help from government in setting-up, with free displays of its founding members' products at government institutions from the V&A to the Crafts Council to London Fashion Week, a sympathetic magazine published by the BBC and even a special study option offered by a Northern Irish exam board. No wonder the people who search online for this kind of ethical fashion tend to be in London, away from the industry that they wipe-out.

One Ethical Fashion Forum founder member - Pants to Poverty - had a problem. If you googled their name and address, you get a list of pages about poverty in Tower Hamlets, within walking distance of their office. That's probably why they had to close; their customers among Guardian-reading Londoners noticed the contradiction. Pantstopoverty.org.uk is a new site that spells-out the argument and might sell UK-made pants in future. The landlord, Rich Mix, now publishes a list of tenants on its web site with no Futerra fashion-related agencies left at all, and mail is returned to senders "not known". Pants was one of the earlier departures, leaving a few days ahead of Tower Hamlets trading standards officers, chasing-up claims of non-delivered pants.




Planb4fashion is a blog by Veganline.com which is a vegan shoe shop

Sunday, 13 December 2015

the new ethical china

the new ethical china

The fake words "ethical fashion" were invented in 2005.

At the same time, government was pumping millions of pounds into Anglo-Chinese trade in the creative industries. UK Trade and Investment had been given the priority. The London Development Agency had an office in Beijing, for reasons that were never clear. "Minister James Purnell" is quoted in the grant proposal. So is this a plot about secret agents, funding PR efforts that would take words like "British", "jobs", "Vegan", "Fair Trade", "Organic", "no fur", "Human Rights" and "Democracy" out of fashion? And replace them with phrases like "concious awareness" and "artisan" and "ethical fashion"?
Did the UK Ambassador to Peking stop raising questions about human rights and say "that's a nice jacket - shall we go shopping?" instead?

Some of what government got-up to at the time is listed in this grant proposal asking for 80% of the Higher Education Funding Council's Innovation Fund, which was duly paid.

University of the Arts Grant to Promote Jobs in China

This is an unsympathetic transcript of University of the Arts grant proposal. No words have been changed but tables and graphics in the original may not convert. Basically there is no safeguard against some creative accountant setting up a seminar called "making it ethically in China", encouraging people to use Chinese manufacturers, and taking tax money of UK manufacturers. The thing seems to be built on a momentum of name dropping and hot air by people who believe nonsense like "the knowledge economy" to justify the world they see rather than look at the human rights record of the Chinese government or the exchange rate manipulation of UK and Chinese governments against the interests of people in the UK. The courtier-ship and grant-artistry starts here.

HEIF 3 Competition Stage 2 Application Form Creative Capital – World City
Part A The case for the project
Creative Capital – World City will provide the specialist business, economic, technical, creative and cultural expertise required to support the UK creative industries expansion into key world markets. The partner universities, which are leaders in these complementary fields, together with the Centre for Creative Business, will deliver this through the Creative Industries Observatory in London and 5 international business hubs in China and India.

“Our economic future lies in high-value, knowledge intensive industries. Put simply, to make the UK the world’s creative hub”

In keeping with UK Government priorities (most recently expressed in the 2006 Budget) and regional policy for London, the purpose of this innovative project is to increase the competitive advantage of UK creative companies doing business, or wishing to do business in India and China, thereby developing the world market for the UK creative industries. Creative Capital – World City will directly support UK companies in identifying and siezing new opportunities, understanding the regional social, cultural, economic and business contexts, preparing their business plans and strategies, and identifying and successfully engaging in business development opportunities in these countries.

Building on proven and successful research and HEIF knowledge transfer (KT) activities e.g. Centre for Creative Business, Enterprise Centre for the Creative Arts and Own IT (Creative London IP advisory service), a new London based centre for expert knowledge in the creative industries will be established. The project will also work with UK-wide creative companies and key creative networks to research creative activity / opportunities and succesfully penetrate and expand demand in the target markets through dedicated staff at five Creative Business Centres overseas. The essence of knowledge transfer in this international context relies upon creating and supporting unique partnerships and collaboration etc to enable particular projects (such as fashion or design projects) to be accomplished. Staff at the Centres will be a critical resource to assist creative companies in sustaining key business relationships in India and China. The project will provide:

The Creative Industries Observatory (CIO), a facility for UK creative businesses which will gather, interpret and deliver high quality relevant intelligence on the target markets and Creative Industry trends in the UK, China and India
5 internationally located business Creative Business Centres - hubs – operated by dedicated business development specialists through which opportunity/ creative business activity and market intelligence can be channelled between Chinese, Indian and London/UK businesses
Networking opportunities in the emerging markets
Liaison with local knowledge and expertise in the target markets
New, carefully targeted, KT activities to assist international development of creative businesses and, through structured training, build their confidence to engage with Indian and Chinese businesses
Support to business in exploiting new creative business opportunities in these emerging markets
Additional direct foreign investment into London and the UK Development of 3rd stream income from KT related to the creative industries for a range of UK HEIs

(A i) Description of the Innovative nature of the project

The innovative nature of the project lies in
Its international ambition i.e. the distinctive UK - China - India dimension which responds to ambitious UK government plans for the creative industries
Its key role for the UK economy in establishing a Creative Industries Observatory, the centre of expert knowledge for understanding and supporting UK creative companies either already engaged in or wishing to enter the emerging markets of China and India
The establishment of international Creative Industries benchmarks based on CIO data
The development of international business/knowledge transfer hubs, the Creative Business Centres
Combining leading edge technology, economic and international studies and applied research with world class creative art and design and business management
A strategic and innovative alliance with highly appropriate corporate partners, HEIs and their networks
The use of international HEI partners with established geographical presence and contact networks in the target regions which will be of immediate help to the project
The innovative use of existing KT networks in London/UK including Centres for Knowledge Exchange networks
Targeting of international KT for the creative industries, with a specific focus on strategic areas of opportunity for UK plc such as digital media and design e.g. Fashion, communications and product.

(A ii) Articulation of need

There are numerous statistics confirming the importance of the creative industries to the UK economy and the need for them to internationalise:
In 2001, creative industries accounted for 8.2% of UK GDP and contributed £54.8 billion to UK Gross Value Added, £112 billion in annual revenue and £11.5 billion in exports.
From 1997-2001 UK creative industries grew by an average of 8% per annum, compared to an average of 2.6% for the whole of the economy.
Creative industries contribute £21 billion to London’s output, a considerable amount juxtaposed with the City’s £35 billion. In terms of jobs growth creative industries are London’s most important sector
From 1997-2002, employment in the UK’s creative industries grew at three times the rate of the economy as a whole. In June 2003 creative employment totalled 1.9m jobs.
The global market value of the creative industries has increased from $831 billion in 2000 to $1.3 trillion in 2005; more than 7% of global GDP

These are vital statistics that need to be kept up to date. The Creative Industries Observatory will liaise with DCMS and other agencies to design and develop an effective programme of ongoing statistical data research.

H.M. Government, via the DCMS and other departments/ agencies, has targeted the creative industries as an important economic sector for UK plc. The London Development Agency has taken a strong lead in setting the regional economic agenda for London with respect to the creative industries. Through its Creative London agency, it has delivered crucial intervention and support to London-based creative businesses.

At the London Business School in November 2005 Creative Industries Minister James Purnell announced the Creative Economy Programme. This seven-step programme will ensure that cultural institutions, policy makers and funding organisations work together to support the growth and productivity of the creative industries. Concurrently the DCMS announced a new measure to promote UK creativity globally. DCMS and UK Trade & Investment, with other partners in government, are supporting the work of three industry led export groups helping to develop the Government strategy for the export of goods and services from the Creative Industries sector:

● Creative Exports Group (CEG) ● Performing Arts International Development (PAID) ● Design Partners

In February 2006 the Creative Industries Minister announced that 7 experts have been appointed to lead the Creative Economy Programme and its drive to make Britain the world’s creative hub

Government recognises the tremendous growth in importance of trade with India and China to the UK, e.g. UK-India Education and Research Initiative (UKIERI) pump primed by £10M of UK government funding which was announced by the Prime Minister in November 2005, the agreement to grant 1,000 working visas a year for Chinese graduates to gain work experience in the UK, the proposed Phase 2 of the Prime Minister’s Initiative to support HEI international activities (April 2006) and the expansion of the Scholarships for Excellence programme - aimed at building links between Chinese business community and UK HE – to all of which University of the Arts London (UAL) will contribute.

A prime source of help for UK companies to improve their international trade is the government agency UK Trade and Investment. Following a recent announcement by Gordon Brown, ‘a revamped UK Trade and Investment will set new targets for expanding trade with China and India and other emerging economies’.
The issue for UK HEIs and for the creative industries, typified by small business, is how do they engage with these international opportunities in a realistic and effective way?

The Creative Capital – World City project has been designed to give direct support to the Government’s Creative Economy Programme. It will work with the DCMS/ UKTI and other agencies to deliver the Government strategy for the export of goods and services from the Creative Industries sector. Creative industries companies will benefit through specialist KT support from universities with relevant expertise, offered in liaison with UKTI support.

London/ UK creative businesses intending to begin trading in India/China need help. There is a key need in China and India to ensure their international developments are sustainably structured for the long-term. They need market intelligence, local contacts, access to Indian and Chinese business networks, showcasing, B2B introductions and local knowledge. They also need assistance with understanding and addressing cultural requirements and specific training in how to best exploit international business opportunities. Partner HEIs need to seize the opportunity for growing 3rd stream income for KT services involving UK creative exports, the demand for which is high in India and China.

“The project looks exceptional and will make a major contribution to the innovation challenge that the UK faces”. Jonathan Kestenbaum CEO of NESTA

“This is a strategically important project for London which will provide clear opportunities to work collaboratively in various ways including staging international events showcasing UK creativity, e.g. internationalising the London Design Festival and the London Film Festival” Tom Campbell - Creative London - a committed delivery partner that welcomes the alignment of the project objectives and intentions with its own creative industries internationalisation programme.

Luke Johnson Chairman of C4 TV has given the project his support. Andrew Summers chairman of Design Partners, the government body (supported by UK Trade & Investment and DCMS) promoting international trade and investment for UK design businesses supports the project and is keen to work with it.

“British Design Innovation very much welcomes it and are keen to loan any support we can and get directly involved where appropriate”. Maxine Horn CEO of British Design Innovation, (which has 4,500 commercial design practices registered with it - representing 95% of the UK commercial design market).

"Creative Capital - World City is an important and timely initiative which is likely to provide invaluable support and intelligence to creative companies looking to do business in China and India”.
Frances Sorrell - The Sorrell Foundation"

The requested £5 million of HEIF 3 funding is crucial to the project. Given their teaching, research and other third stream commitments, the partner HEIs would not be able to undertake the Creative Capital –World City project without this necessary additional funding.

(A iii) Planned impact on UK’s economy and society

This project will not lead to British creativity fuelling Indian/Chinese market ascendancy. It will enable UK companies to compete effectively with other first world players by embedding London/UK creative expertise in business development opportunities in India/China. Leveraging the existing collaborative projects and established networks of the partners, the project will:-
  • analyse markets in China and India, understand what London/UK creative businesses can offer and through the 5 Creative Business Centres, broker interactions between the market and companies
  • analyse the needs of UK creative businesses to develop specialist ‘toolkits’ which interpret and contextualise generic support materials from for example, DTI/UKTI, and supplement these with targeted research/trend analysis and training
  • assist creative businesses to ‘sell’ creativity and innovation, including co-investment and co-development in what are crucial emerging market places whilst safeguarding their IP value/assets
  • safeguard existing creative industry jobs and create new ones in London and the UK
  • grow third stream income for a wide range of HEIs in London/UK through innovative KT including business internships, international ‘KTPs’, MA/MBA exchange and new course development, and internationalised academic input
  • actively identify and feedback intelligence on international business opportunities to London based creative industry companies and key networks
  • improve knowledge of UK creative industries economic performance and establish international Creative Industry benchmarks to measure performance

(B i) Key Project Partners

The core partnership is strategically complementary and has a track record of designing, managing and delivering on major publicly funded projects including large--scale research projects and knowledge transfer under HEIF 2. It brings together
  • University of the Arts London (the lead partner) 
  • LBS
  • School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) 
  • Kings College London
  • Centre for Creative Business (a UAL/ LBS joint venture)

The partnership features universities recognised as leading UK institutions with 5/5*research grades, which through well established networks are already very active internationally in student recruitment, course delivery and knowledge transfer. The partners are well known to each other, have very good working relationships and share the ‘big picture’ with respect to their strategic international development. Together they provide a highly competent force, equipped with creative industry related art, design, technical, technological, political, cultural, social, economic and business management expertise to assist UK creative businesses to succeed in India and China. The high quality knowledge transfer, dissemination and business support networks that the partners are already engaged in will be leveraged to drive further business involvement for ‘Creative Cities. These same networks are also adept at monitoring and analysing user involvement to ensure that the project delivers required outcomes. The project has the support of major creative industry organisations, creative clusters and creative companies in each target area.

The project is based at University of the Arts London, the UK University most closely linked to those creative industries. UAL plays a vital role in serving the knowledge transfer needs of the creative industries in London and the UK, in the arts (visual and performing), design and communications. It already provides a wide range of excellent creative industry focused K T services to London/ UK including, Innovation Centre, Design Laboratory, Centre for Fashion Enterprise, Fashion Business Resource Studio, CoVE Retail, CoVE Fashion, Own It Intellectual Property Advice Service (in partnership with Creative London), Artquest, The Intelligent Media Initiative. Exchange - London’s creative Centre for Knowledge Exchange, IP commercialisation (e.g. licensing, start-up and spin-out companies – via UAL Ventures ltd), consultancy and Knowledge Transfer Partnerships.

In collaboration with London Business School, University of the Arts London operates a joint HEIF 2 funded venture - the Centre for Creative Business tasked with driving innovative new forms of UK-based creative business out of LBS and UAL MBA/ MA programmes through its New Creative Ventures programme and assists existing creative businesses to grow significantly through its Building the Creative Ventures programme. CCB has been a major success story. It is often cited by the Creative Industries Minister James Purnell as an excellent example of what can be done when two leading HEIs with strongly complementary disciplines come together.

(B ii) Indicative contribution from each HEFCE funded partner

Partner Relevant Expertise Contribution

King’s College London Evidence Network; School of Social Science and Public Policy; Cities Group;
School of Humanities;
Risk Management Centre Expertise in evidence based policy methodology
Economic impact techniques
London Centre for Arts and Cultural Enterprise (HEIF 2 funded project)
International, interdisciplinary research using spatial techniques to investigate cultural and economic development.
School of African & Asian Studies Centre for South Asian Studies; Centre for Contemporary China Institute; SOAS Language Centre; SOAS Interface Interdisciplinary approach to understanding the context and dynamics of the target markets
Language and cultural programmes for business to develop skills in Chinese and South Asian languages
London Business School Aditya V Birla Centre

Innovation Centre

Digital Transformations
Mutually beneficial academic exchange between Indian business and the global business community
Macro and micro knowledge of the digital technology industry and access to businesses
Social and economic impact of information and communication technology at macro and micro levels
Centre for Creative Business Driving innovative new forms of creative business; assisting existing creative businesses to grow significantly. Management development programmes
- Potential internationalisation action.
Database of 5,000 creative businesses
Track record of delivering high profile events

Through the combination of its complementary skills and knowledge the partnership will provide:
Guidance on the data collection methodologies and interpretation methods for the Observatory (KCL)
Insights into the cultural, political, and economic dynamics of the target countries and our Creative Business Centres within them (KCL/ SOAS)
Expertise in the delivery of specific aspects of activity such as languages/learning advice, business strategy, investment appraisal and risk appraisal (KCL/ SOAS)
Access to the best possible core data on UK creative businesses and routes for the project to communicate with them. (CCB)
First rate executive education specifically relevant to the creative industries in the UK and the target markets (LBS/ UAL)
Collection of and access to existing published and unpublished reports, and mapping exercises (UAL/ LBS/ CCB)

Each of the partners brings to the project considerable experience in the management and successful delivery of major publicly funded projects such as UAL’s £5m CETL and Screen Academy projects, King’s London Centre for Arts and Cultural Enterprise and LBS Centre for Scientific Enterprise Ltd.

(B iii) Project Management Arrangements

The University of the Arts London as the Lead Partner will be the accountable body. A Project Director will be appointed to manage the overall project and will travel to the five Creative Business Centres to ensure that the deliverables are achieved.  The job descriptions and person specifications for both the Project and Observatory Director posts will reflect the need for these staff to have demonstrable experience in an international context. A Management Board will direct the strategic management of the project. A leading representative of the Creative Industries will chair the Board. It will have membership from each of the partners, employers and the project team. Invited Observers e.g. Mayor of London’s Office, UK Trade and Industry, OST, and liaison with advisory bodies in the priority sub sectors will further ensure full employer engagement.

Part C Detailed Business Plan

(C i) Activities 2006-08 and beyond

This innovative and necessary project has three inter-related components: the Project Management Centre, the Creative Industries Observatory and five Creative Business Centres in China and India.

This is not intended to be a short-term project. The initial project lifespan funded by HEIF 3 will be extended into future years with income generated through the provision of KT activities and services both in London/UK but primarily in the target markets in China and India. To lay an effective foundation for this project it is anticipated that a pre-project preparation, consultation and staff recruitment period will be required. We therefore suggest that the official project start date/public launch might reasonably be deferred to late 2006 as the project is phased in.

Working with the enthusiastic support of key local agencies including Creative London and London First the project will establish the Creative Industry Observatory in London and five international business hubs (Creative Business Centres) located in China and India (a timeline for the project appears below in Section C vi). The project will work with Business Links for London, London Chamber of Commerce and other creative industry business networks in London and the UK, to reach the largest possible number of creative businesses. The project also has the direct support of numerous delivery partner companies including large corporates such as Deloitte that are already well established and active in China and India. Through close liaison it will complement and enhance the work of UKTI (noting the particular emphasis that UKTI is now expected to apply to developing trade activity with China and India), British Council, Creative London, the proposed National Centre for Design and Creativity (Cox Report recommendation) and the Mayor’s Office/Think London operation in Beijing. The operation of these elements of the project will be coordinated through the Project Management Centre at the University of the Arts London.

(C ii) Project Management Centre

The Project Management Centre will provide the financial and administrative management for the project. The Project Director will coordinate and manage the work of the Business Development Managers (BDMs) in the UK and at the Creative Business Centres in China and India and will liaise closely with the Director of the Creative Industries Observatory. UK based BDMs will work with creative industry networks, companies and agencies. Partner based BDMs will also be tasked with the internal ‘selling’ of the project in order to ensure that partners benefit fully from the project and contribute to the project in terms of the international knowledge transfer opportunities through the Centres and the provision of specialist consultancy services through the Creative Industry Observatory.

(C iii) The Creative Industry Observatory

Based at UAL’s: London College of Communication, the Creative Industry Observatory will be developed as an authoritative information, observation and dissemination resource. Staffed by specialist information managers, analysts and researchers the Observatory will:

Collect and provide datasets on e.g. London and UK Creative Industries activity; creative businesses in UK China and India and new creative business opportunities.
Commission research to plug gaps in baseline creative industries subsectoral analysis/market analysis and regulatory frameworks
Produce publications/journal/information updates
Organise and present conferences/seminars/workshops
Carry out brokerage/introductions between creative industry companies through its events programme

Additionally the Observatory will also accept commissions from agencies e.g. DCMS and DTI, to research, provide and maintain urgently needed fresh creative industries data e.g. provide a London and national creative industries subsectoral primary baseline data analysis/ tracking exercise. It is expected that this will aid project sustainability.

(C iv) The International Creative Business Centres

The project will develop Creative Business Centres in:

China: · Beijing · Hong Kong · Shanghai India: · Mumbai · New Delhi

The five Centres will not be “cold starts”, but will be cost effective arrangements that build on existing agency, university and corporate partnerships and networks e.g. with the Beijing Design Centre and Tsinghua University. This will enable an immediate project presence in the target markets, supported locally through links with our partner Universities in China and India, which will be ready to take advantage of known business prospects. Activity at Centres in each location will be quickly ramped up through these proven operational relationships.

Each of the Creative Business Centres will have a physical presence, staffed by dedicated business development specialists and co-located in prime positions typically within delivery partner organisations. Business development staff at the Centres will proactively seek, generate and orchestrate new business opportunity, broker relationships between Chinese, Indian and UK companies and provide technical, cultural and ‘trouble shooting’ support. The Centres will provide a locus for further developing influential networks in the target markets, for market research and data gathering, for channelling market intelligence back to the UK. All Centres will be equipped with appropriate technology to enable fast reliable continuous contact including video conferencing between staff at each Centre, the Creative Industries Observatory and the project management centre. Where local partnerships are unable to provide suitable venues, appropriate commercial premises will be hired for the staging of events. The volume of KT and business activity driven by each Centre will be monitored and should any of these be performing at a lower level than expected, a virtual Centre established in agency premises may replace the physical presence.

(C v) Key outcomes and deliverables of the project will be:

The establishment of the Creative Industry Observatory and its subsequent operation as an exemplar of sector focused KT excellence; as a source of specialist expert knowledge, leading to new joint ventures and commercial agreements between London/UK companies and those in China and India . It will provide valuable contextualised intelligence to and from the Creative Business Centre, UKTI and other agencies, to UK businesses via on-line and other media/events
The establishment of 5 International Creative Business Centre networks to support knowledge transfer activity in stated areas
Estimated £2.0m p.a. revenue potential from international knowledge transfer activities by July 2008
12-15 international business development staff appointed across the network
5 databases of international contacts
15 regionally focused (i.e. 3 per Centre) marketing and promotional events per year
1500 creative industries businesses briefed through 6 - 10 London based strategic business opportunity seminars during the project
The Creative Capital – World City website
Regular specialist on-line e-briefings on India/China opportunities
On-line multi media/interactive specialist support for new business development
100 international business-to-business introductions brokered
10 international business opportunity focused ‘grow your creative business’ events for London based creative industry companies and 10 similar events delivered locally for Indian and Chinese creative companies which will showcase London/UK creativity
‘International Knowledge Transfer Partnerships’ and ‘mini-KTPs’ (will be developed based on experience of graduate placement in international locations) that will be sponsored by Indian and Chinese companies

(C vi) Independent Evaluation Arrangements

Evaluation will be a constant theme/presence throughout the project. The individual contributions of each partner will be subject to several levels of quality control and evaluation, the first line of which will be the existing quality control procedures of each partner. The project management team will internally evaluate each significant project event and interaction in line with customer care best practice – reporting biannually to the Board. Impact assessments will be made of all operational aspects of the project.

Separate to these measures there will be external evaluation at initiation, during and on completion of the project. This will be carried out by independent external specialist evaluation consultants who will be appointed to the project following a selection process. A budget element has been earmarked for this, and potential sources, e.g. University of Glasgow Cultural Policy Group and Innovation Partners Ltd, have already been approached.

(C vii) Dissemination of Project Results

A comprehensive dissemination strategy will be agreed with the Management Board. The principle means of dissemination – not only of results but of process and progress – is intended to be the project website and links to the websites of partners including London First and Creative London. It is also intended that the project will also be featured in creative industries publications and those of the Mayor’s Office and LDA. The Observatory will launch the Creative Industries Journal as the authoritative refereed commentary on the creative industries in the UK, which will also disseminate data/findings from the project. The importance of disseminating information about the project and its impact, to business organisations, trade and professional associations; the HE Sector; UK government agencies; knowledge transfer networks other relevant CKEs in London and the UK and most importantly of similar bodies in China and India is recognised. There will be publications emanating from the project as well as targeted seminars and events targeted both at specific creative sub-sectors, broader business and the broad Creative Industries. Reference will be made to HEIF/HEFCE and DTI-OST throughout the dissemination process.
(C viii) Exit Strategy and Sustainability

This is an ambitiuous venture, with sustainability as an achievable objective. It is envisaged that significant income will be generated from the proposed activities, but this may not be fully in place within two years.

The initial project lifespan funded by HEIF 3 will be extended into future years with income generated through the provision of high quality knowledge transfer activities and services both in London/UK but primarily in the target markets. The first two years will feature an awareness raising campaign as the partnership builds the Creative Business Centre brand recognition at the initial locations. It will also further business partnerships and investment through which the brand and thus the centres concept can be extended to more geographical areas. The project will build a new self-sustaining business model, which will continue to grow in line with the anticipated growth of the Chinese and Indian markets for the creative industries.

It is expected that there will be significant opportunities for co-investment with Chinese and Indian partners, which will defray a large part of the direct operational costs to the partners in future years. The business model also anticipates the possibility of co-developing the Centres as collaborative businesses drawing in more UK creative companies, as the market for creativity in China and India extends to many other cities. This will give the partnership a much wider engagement with the Chinese and Indian marketplace, greatly increasing the potential returns to London/ UK creative businesses, to associated Chinese and Indian companies, and to the HEI partners as the demand for their knowledge transfer services grows. Revenue (in part potentially royalty payments) from this will feed back to the project to support the continued marketing and management of the business. The CIO will also actively seek to generate income through commissions and events. If insufficient progress towards some areas of self-sufficiency has been made two years from the start date, the project could be scaled back (e.g. some of the Creative Business Centres could become virtual centres to a level that can be sustained by the income generated from them) without loss of its overall thrust.

HEFCE/OST are being asked to provide essential start up funds to enable infrastructure development, cover expected start up costs and provide a stable platform for the first two years on which a sustainable operation can be built. Our belief in our ability to achieve sustainability is supported by the way in which the partners have over recent years been developing successful overseas recruitment and consultancy businesses in the target regions.

(C ix) Key Risk Factors

A strong partnership has been put together that has good experience of working successfully overseas. The potential pitfalls and challenges are largely known and many have been encountered and effectively dealt with in the past. However, this does not mean that the partnership is complacent about risk. As part of the business plan, a fuller assessment and treatment of risk will be undertaken with King’s College London’s Risk Strategy Group. A risk management strategy will subsequently be devised. Some indicative risks have been set out below.

Indicative Risk Rating Action
Unable to recruit appropriate staff or Low/ Medium Phase these international activities slightly
premises in China/India slower than in timeline
Partners unable to agree on share/ Low/ Medium Board to develop formal partnership agreements
distribution of income/benefit
Lack of KT business opportunities in Low/ Medium Vigorous campaign in target markets
China and India with UKTI and delivery partners in target markets
Income does not grow sufficiently Medium Scale back Hub/CIO activity to sustainable level
to fund Year 3 operation recast some centres as virtual centres
Seek co-investment/ merger with local partners
Too many CI sub sectors too early. Medium Focus on key selected areas initially
Slow bureaucracy in both countries Medium/ High Local partners well used to this will advise/ guide
Financial export restrictions/guarantees Medium Chinese income held in China and used to offset partner
(mainly China) costs on other (e.g. recruitment) operations.
Absence of experience of international High Careful screening/selection of business partners,
business standards use of strong contracts, particularly IPR
but recognise that even so, risk remains

The project represents a novel HEIF/business model but the experience of the partners in developing international operations and in delivering on HEIF/ third stream developments and other major collaborative projects reduces the risk associated with it
(C x) Finances

John Robertson left an annotation ()

In their own words: this from
http://www.ikt.org.uk/heif3/Forum.aspx?L...

Lessons learnt.
These are the lessons learnt so far from delivering our HEIF 3 project - to find a full copy of our winning bid please click download on this page.

1. The first lesson is that everything takes much longer than you might expect it to. Everything is being done at a distance, in different time zones. In the case of China particularly, time needed to be spent to understand the business culture and the systems of business development before the programme could really begin to engage with Chinese business. There is also a very real need to overcome a significant language barrier. All of this was more or less foreseen, but the practical impact of it on our ability to mount the programme only became apparent once the programme got underway.

2. Having an in-country presence of senior UK managers is highly desirable, yet this is not practicable. Although we have fairly frequent visits to China and India to compensate, we remain to a very large extent reliant upon those that we have recruited. Good local knowledge and contacts are highly valued, but this by itself is not enough. Good experience of and ability in business development is also extremely important. Recruiting the right people is crucial as is regular management contact with and support for them through a mix of technology based and face-to-face communication.

3. Recruiting the right people has been problematical and more expensive than had been expected. Not surprisingly, compensation has had to be adjusted to reflect market conditions in each locality. Because recruitment to the programme is taking place during a period of private sector expansion, the market in each locality has been found to be particularly tight with respect to finding well-qualified individuals with good language skills. This has led to higher costs and delayed recruitment.

4. Reliance has had to be placed on outsourced services and agents to provide the kind of ‘back office’ administration and support that we take for granted in our own HEI. This is largely because our own in-house services do not necessarily have the experience or expertise to provide much needed guidance and support to a programme that operates across international boundaries and under different legislative regimes. Initial assumptions concerning the extent to which existing relationships with our network of recruitment agents could be leveraged to provide such services have not been borne out in practice. This has all placed additional strain on the Programme Management Team, which it is fair to say has done tremendously well to cope with a severe learning curve.

5. The development of a fully functioning internal and external partnership also requires a lot of time and effort even if, as in our case, those partners are largely known to you and have experience of working together on different projects. Large-scale projects bring their own tensions and partners bring their own expectations and agendas. We have learned that there is a clear need for good communication (which we have not always managed as well as we might wish), for clear understanding of the mutual purpose and objectives of the project (not always acknowledged within a partnership) and that while consensual agreement is always sought, resolute leadership is a quality that should not be underestimated.

6. Having the support and advice of very experienced and accomplished Creative Industries business people on the Programme Advisory Board has been extremely beneficial in moving towards the achievement of a balanced approach to the commercial and academic aspects of international knowledge transfer as well as assisting with strategising and implementing the programme.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Summery by transcriber:

Nobody who can get a better job would want to work in a quango supporting Chinese autocracy at the expense of people who pay for the quango. It's a nonsense. Nobody applies.

Nobody knows what this project is for and those who apply by accident and perhaps really think that China trade on fiddled exchange rates by both sides is good for taxpayers in the UK, get the job. Well done. They also find a mixture of briefs and interventions which keeps them in London and prevents them doing the job they hoped to do.

Frankly it's a plaything of courtiers; job creation by Marie Antoinette

John Robertson left an annotation ()

related: London Fashion week @ £4.2m over 3 years no longer even pretends to have figures about job creation: http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/lo...


Planb4fashion is a blog by Veganline.com which is a vegan shoe shop


Cheap factory expensive shop

Cheap factory expensive shop

http://www.guardian.co.uk/…/2013/jul/28/india-sweated-labour - after reading six pages of comment after this article I discover
(1) a challenging rant with a challenging headline that offers no solution begs six pages or more of feebdack on a national newspaper site

(2) the fairtrade label is not completely trusted; people could do with a link on a swing-tag or something to help them check the checking system. Someone said it's a bit like labels on eggs - there's a lot to learn. Others distrust all claims. The article itself is a rant that lumps all ethical claims together and asks consumer to ask more questions
(4) UK-made or European-made goods are looked-for but not found. No surprise when our government rules-out compulsory labels to say where clothes come from, and ignores requests for more data from which to write trade directories.

(5) Several people - not just me - ask why the Bangladeshi government doesn't do its job and introduce some list of changes if it is to get 0% tariff access to the European market. This is in the spirit of the rant article, which questions respect for Indian authorities "Last week India's powerful planning commission claimed that poverty was at a record low of 21.9% of the population. It did so on the basis that people could live on 26 rupees (29p) a day in rural areas (33 rupees in urban areas). Many inside India baulk at this. Few outside the country did so."

(6) Every Guardian reader, Indian or British, is puzzled by the cost of shipping something to well-organised warehouse and from there to branches of some smart and advertised chain store in shopping centres or high streets. Nike and Addidas may be extreme in how much their brand costs and matters, but everything sold in modern shopping centres carries a big price tag for the shopping centre itself and getting stuff there, branded or not. The common debate is why M and S charge so much more than Primark when the technicalities of their shops are only so-much different and what they pay their suppliers is only so-much different. Nobody knows! One reader suggested that Gieves and Hawkes of Saville Row now sends some of its handmade work to India and back without the client knowing.


This is the article copied from the Guardian, with a link.


Until three years ago I did not believe in magic. But that was before I began investigating how western brands perform a conjuring routine that makes the great Indian rope trick pale in comparison. Now I'm beginning to believe someone has cast a spell over the world's consumers.

This is how it works. Well Known Company makes shiny, pretty things in India or China. The Observer reports that the people making the shiny, pretty things are being paid buttons and, what's more, have been using children's nimble little fingers to put them together. There is much outrage, WKC professes its horror that it has been let down by its supply chain and promises to make everything better. And then nothing happens. WKC keeps making shiny, pretty things and people keep buying them. Because they love them. Because they are cheap. And because they have let themselves be bewitched.

Last week I revealed how poverty wages in India's tea industry fuel a slave trade in teenage girls whose parents cannot afford to keep them. Tea drinkers were naturally upset. So the ethical bodies that certified Assam tea estates paying a basic 12p an hour were wheeled out to give the impression everything would be made right.

For many consumers, that is enough. They want to feel that they are being ethical. But they don't want to pay more. They are prepared to believe in the brands they love. Companies know this. They know that if they make the right noises about behaving ethically, their customers will turn a blind eye.

So they come down hard on suppliers highlighted by the media. They sign up to the certification schemes – the Ethical Trading Initiative, Fairtrade, the Rainforest Alliance and others. Look, they say, we are good guys now. We audit our factories. We have rules, codes of conduct, mission statements. We are ethical. 

But they are not. What they have done is purchase an ethical fig leaf.

In the last few years, companies have got smarter. It is rare now to find children in the top level of the supply chain, because the brands know this is PR suicide. But the wages still stink, the hours are still brutal, and the children are still there, stitching away in the backstreets of the slums.

Drive east out of Delhi for an hour or so into the industrial wasteland of Ghaziabad and take a stroll down some of the back lanes. You might want to watch your step, to avoid falling into the stinking open drains. Take a look through some of the doorways. See the children stitching the fine embroidery and beading? Now take a stroll through your favourite mall and have a look at the shelves. Recognise some of that handiwork? You should.

Suppliers now subcontract work out from the main factory, maybe more than once. The work is done out of sight, the pieces sent back to the main factory to be finished and labelled. And when the auditors come round the factory, they can say that there were no children and all was well. Because audits are part of the act. Often it is as simple as two sets of books, one for the brand, one for themselves. The brand's books say everyone works eight hours a day with a lunch break. The real books show the profits from 16-hour days and no days off all month.

Need fire extinguishers to tick the safety box? Hire them in for the day. The lift is a deathtrap? Stick a sign on it to say it is out of use and the inspector will pass it by. The dark arts thrive in the inspection business. We, the consumers, let them do this because we want the shiny, pretty thing. And we grumble that times are tight, we can't be expected to pay more and, anyway, those places are very cheap to live in.
This is the other part of the magic trick, the western perception of the supplier countries, born of ignorance and embarrassment. India, more than most, knows how to play on this. Governments and celebrities fall over themselves to laud India for its progress. India is on the up, India is booming, India is very spiritual, India is vibrant. Sure, the workers are poor, but they are probably happy.

No, they are not. India has made the brands look rank amateurs in the field of public relations. Yes, we know it is protectionist, yes, we know working conditions are often diabolical, but we are in thrall to a country that seems impossibly exotic.

Colonial guilt helps. The British in particular feel awkward about India. We stole their country and plundered their riches. We don't feel able to criticise. But we should. China still gets caught out, but wages have risen and working conditions have improved. India seems content to rely on no one challenging it.

Last week India's powerful planning commission claimed that poverty was at a record low of 21.9% of the population. It did so on the basis that people could live on 26 rupees (29p) a day in rural areas (33 rupees in urban areas). Many inside India baulk at this. Few outside the country did so.

But times are tough, consumers say. This is the most pernicious of the ideas the brands have encouraged. Here's some maths from an Observer investigation last year in Bangalore. We can calculate that women on the absolute legal minimum wage, making jeans for a WKC, get 11p per item. Now wave your own wand and grant them the living monthly wage – the £136 the Asia Floor Wage Alliance calculates is needed to support a family in India today (and bear in mind that the women are often the sole earners). It is going to cost a fortune, right? No. It will cost 15p more on the labour cost of each pair of jeans.
The very fact that wages are so low makes the cost of fixing the problem low, too. Someone has to absorb the hit, be it the brand, supplier, middleman, retailer or consumer. But why make this a bad thing? 

Why be scared of it?

Here is the shopper, agonising over ethical or cheap. What if they can do both? What if they can pluck two pairs of jeans off the rail and hold them up. One costs £20. One costs £20.15. It has a big label on it, which says "I'm proud to pay 15p more for these jeans. I believe everyone has the right to a decent standard of living. My jeans were made by a happy worker who was paid the fair rate for the job."
Go further. Stitch it on to the jeans themselves. I want those jeans. I want to know I'm not wearing something stitched by kids kept locked in backstreet godowns, never seeing the light of day, never getting a penny. I want to feel clean. And I want the big brands and the supermarkets to help me feel clean.

I want people to say to them: "You deceived us. You told us you were ethical. We want you to change. We want you to police your supply chain as if you care. Name your suppliers. Open them to independent inspection. We want to trust you again, we really do, because we love your products. Know what? We don't mind paying a few pennies more if you promise to chip in too."


And here's the best part: I think they would sell more. I think consumers would be happier and workers would be happier. And if I can spend less time trawling through fetid backstreets looking for the truth, I'll be happier.


guardian.co.uk | By Gethin Chamberlain

-----------------------
Photo of ten "Young boys rescued from child traffickers at Katihar station in Bihar state, India, waiting for their parents to collect them". I have no idea what stories are hidden here, but know that some kind of welfare state in more of India could be part of the answer



Planb4fashion is a blog by Veganline.com which is a vegan shoe shop

Tuesday, 3 September 2013

Avaaz petition: Enough fashion victims

http://www.avaaz.org/en/gap_enough_fashion_victims_global/?bAiIibb&v=24973 -
this Avaaz petition to big shopkeepers is only part of the answer. Tariffs against sweatshops are much better. But every little helps





Planb4fashion is a blog by Veganline.com which is a vegan shoe shop