Introduction

GCP has launched a regular five-year review cycle for the Coffee Sustainability Reference Code (Coffee SR Code) and the Equivalence Mechanism (EM), following best practices under ISO and the ISEAL Code of Good Practice, to ensure their continued relevance and effectiveness.

AS part of the combined review of the Coffee SR Code and EM in 2026, we began a scoping assessment in QIV2025. This included stakeholder input, analysis of the requirements and tools, and landscape and context analysis.

We want to hear from YOU, our stakeholders.
Your input will be collated as an input anonymized and without attribution. We will share a summary of the input with stakeholders.

Please provide your input by February 13th.

Please do not hesitate to contact me directly if you have any questions, comments or suggestions arussillo@liseed.com
Aimee Russillo

Question Title

* 1. Your name

Question Title

* 2. Your organisation

Question Title

* 3. Are you a GCP member?

Question Title

* 4. Which best describes your role or organization?

Question Title

* 5. How familiar are you with the GCP CSRC and/or EM tools?

Question Title

* 6. Relevance. On a scale of 1-5, please rate the following:

  1. Not very relevant 2. Slightly relevant 3. Relevant but room for improvement 4. Pretty relevant 5. Very relevant!!
The Coffee SR Code adequately reflects current sustainability priorities and challenges in the global coffee sector (e.g., climate resilience, human rights due diligence, economic viability).
The Equivalence Mechanism effectively responds to sector needs for comparability, credibility, and harmonization among sustainability schemes.

Question Title

* 7. Coherence. On a scale of 1-5, please rate the following:

  1. Not coherent 2. Some coherence 3. Coherent but room for improvement 4. Pretty coherent 5. Very coherent!!
The Coffee SR Code complement the sustainability frameworks or standards your organization uses or aligns with.
The EM help reduce conflicting or overlapping requirements among sustainability schemes, standards, or supply chain actors you work with.

Question Title

* 8. Effectiveness: has the Coffee SR Code met its objectives?
In your opinion, to what extent has the Coffee SR Code met the following objectives:

  1.Not at all achieved 2.Slightly achieved 3.Moderately achieved 4.Largely achieved 5.Fully achieved
Provide a common language to describe and assess coffee sustainability.
Improved coordination and alignment with supply chain partners
Enabled companies to increase sourcing from suppliers that meet baseline sustainability expectations
Contributed to improved sustainability performance and resilience for producers in SR code aligned programs

Question Title

* 9. Effectiveness: has the EM met its objectives?
In your opinion, to what extent has the EM met the following objectives:

  1.Not at all achieved 2.Slightly achieved 3.Moderately achieved 4.Largely achieved 5.Fully achieved
Establishes a robust, independent process to benchmark sustainability schemes against the SR Code.
Increased confidence in GCP-recognized schemes.
Increased sourcing from GCP-recognized schemes.
Increased volume of Sustainable Coffee purchases through GCP recognized schemes.
Contributed to improved sustainability performance and resilience for producers in recognized scheme.

Question Title

* 10. Areas for Improvement: Optional
What are the elements or areas that need improvement (this could be content, format, understanding, etc) to ensure relevance and effectiveness? and why?
Please be as specific as possible and we would love to hear concrete suggestions and questions.

Question Title

* 11. Final thoughts. Optional
Do you have any additional words of advice, suggestions or specific questions you have that you think should be considered during the CSRC/EM review?

THANK YOU FOR YOUR INPUT.   PLEASE SEND ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS DIRECTLY TO ARUSSILLO@LISEED.COM

T