That’s a term well known to those of us who work in international trade. But it might be unfamiliar to some others, so it’s good to clear up any confusion.

The global value chain is a broader way of looking at what has traditionally been thought of as the “global supply chain.”

The supply chain generally looks at the parts or materials that go into a product, where a product is manufactured and the transportation logistics of getting it from the factory to the store.

But the global value chain looks at much more. It takes into consideration contributions such as product design, research and development, advertising and other marketing. Even the work of lawyers, bankers, accountants and IT experts who help make a product possible is taken into consideration. There is also recognition that the part or materials in a product don’t necessarily come from the same place where it was manufactured.

All of those contributions have value – both in adding to what the product is worth to a consumer and the value that all of those jobs bring to the economy. That’s why it’s called a “value” chain rather than just a supply chain.

The focus of the study commissioned by NRF – “Rethinking Made in America in the 21^st Century” – is that imported products sold in the United States contain a lot more U.S. value and support more U.S. jobs than consumers or policymakers realize. A product labeled “Made in China” might actually include parts made in America and virtually always represents a wide variety of U.S. jobs such as those mentioned above.

“Does ‘Made in America’ really mean what people think?” the study asks. “Imported goods with foreign labels often include significant but unrevealed amounts of U.S. content.”

The report takes a close look at three key categories – apparel, automobiles and electronics. It reveals that 70 percent of the value in a piece of clothing comes from the United States on average. Some “foreign” cars actually have more U.S. parts than “American” cars. And the Apple iPod contains about 40 times as much American content as Chinese content.

With policymakers often arguing that exports are good and imports are bad, this report tries to make it clear that millions of U.S. jobs rely on imported products, both in creating them and in selling them. It also asks policymakers to realize that it’s retailers who create the markets where manufacturers’ products are sold to consumers. Without that interface with the consumer, nothing would get sold and there would be no need to manufacture the product.

This report comes during Imports Work Week, and it builds on previous studies that have shown how imports support U.S. jobs such as last year’s Imports Work for America study.

So, the next time you think about the global supply chain behind a product, remember that it’s really a global value chain.

Watch Ship the Box.

Unfortunately America’s infrastructure is struggling to handle the nation’s growing needs. In fact, the American Society for Civil Engineers latest Report Card for America’s Infrastructure says the system is failing. This is especially troubling looking at the nation’s “multi-modal” infrastructure – where roads, rail and ports come together so a holiday gift that comes into the country by ship can be efficiently moved to its final destination by train and truck.

Why does this matter for retailers? Retailers are among the nation’s largest shippers, moving hundreds of billions of dollars of merchandise each year. As NRF President and CEO Matthew Shay noted at the recent Infrastructure for the Future Summit, “Safe and efficient transportation and infrastructure is critical for the supply chain. Infrastructure investments must keep up with the expected demand for freight movement and consumer demand.”

What can be done to improve U.S. infrastructure? The White House and Congress have continuously called for additional investment in infrastructure. But we are facing a critical time for action. The current highway reauthorization bill is set to expire in September 2014, and it is vital that Congress begin the debate well before then rather than leaving it to the last minute as has been done in the past. There has been some progress: The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee’s special Panel on 21^st Century Freight Transportation recently released a report identifying the fundamental needs for multi-modal freight movement that need to be included in the next highway bill.

While this is a good first step, Congress needs to begin work now on the entire scope of this important legislation. Creating a national, multi-modal freight policy is an important component to ensuring that freight infrastructure meets future needs. Identifying a long-term and sustainable funding mechanism is just as significant.

This is important for not only for Santa and his elves, but all the other supply chain “elves” who support global commerce through our nation’s infrastructure during the holidays and all year long.

I’ll moderate a webinar for the retail community on June 10, when government and industry officials will cover these issues and provide an update of what’s being done. I asked State Department Assistant Secretary for Economic and Business Affairs Jose Fernandez to preview the discussion and provide an overview of the Kimberley Process, which specifically addresses the sourcing of “conflict” diamonds, and to discuss broader issues affecting the diamond supply chain.

Responsible sourcing of diamonds and other minerals is an important process for retailers to satisfy their customers’ needs. Can you discuss the role of the State Department in this process and what progress you have seen over the years?

Jose Fernandez, U.S. State Department, Assistant Secretary for Economic and Business Affairs

As the lead agency on foreign policy and a primary advocate for American business overseas, the Department of State engages with these issues on a number of levels, from specific engagement in countries and regions where responsible sourcing plays a particularly critical role to general outreach on how American businesses can both promote and benefit from responsible sourcing throughout their supply chains. As Assistant Secretary, I have focused on the concept of “doing well by doing good,” and I am pleased to say that working together with my colleagues at State and the Administration we have succeeded in making great strides in this area. In the last few years, we have seen significant progress through the development of international tools such as the U.N. Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Sourcing of Minerals, an update of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, and industry-led resources such as the Diamond Source Warranty Protocol.

The Kimberley Process has been in place for about 10 years now. What have we learned over the past decade? What are the next steps that companies can take?

The achievements of the Kimberly Process must be recognized. No other commodity has a certification scheme applicable to all cross-border shipments anywhere in the world, and the KP’s effectiveness has relied on a unique and diligent collaboration between the public and private sector. The KP has not only limited the ability of rebel movements to finance efforts to overthrow legitimate governments through diamonds, it has helped foster improved monitoring in the vast range of producing, trading, and consuming countries. In doing so, it has become a platform for focusing on the specific needs and challenges associated with artisanal diamond mining. We look to all U.S. companies that work in the diamond supply chain to understand what the KP is – and isn’t – and how they can continue to ensure compliance with relevant laws in KP participating countries.

The KP does have a very specific scope, however, which is preventing rebel groups from using rough diamonds to finance violence aimed at undermining legitimate governments. An effort to modernize that mandate is ongoing, but regardless of the outcome of these discussions there are a range of issues that confront diamond supply chains that fall outside the KP’s writ, at least with respect to certification. As such, we look to businesses to engage with their suppliers on these concerns.

What resources (groups, organizations or other programs) can retailers utilize to educate themselves on responsible mineral sourcing issues?

As I mentioned, the U.N. Guiding Principles and OECD Due Diligence Guidance provide excellent starting points as frameworks for understanding how to approach responsible supply chains. With respect to diamonds, I would point to the work of the Responsible Jewelery Council on its Code of Practices and related Chain of Custody standards, the combined initiative of the Jewelers of America/Jewelers Vigilance Committee and the Diamond Manufacturers and Importers Association to develop the Diamond Source Warranty Protocol, and the Diamond Development Initiative’s project on identifying and implementing development diamond standards. More recently, a Multi-Stakeholder Working Group has formed to investigate whether there should be additional due diligence guidance developed for industry in the precious stones sector. This working group is eager to have broader participation from all aspects of the trade including retailers. In all cases, we urge companies also to consider how these efforts include the artisanal mining sector as we believe promoting development here is an essential element of responsible sourcing.

Responsible business conduct plays an increasingly important role in consumers’ shopping decisions. How would you suggest companies approach issues concerning the impact of their operations, including their sourcing practices?

Companies should start by establishing appropriate policies, designating senior personnel to oversee those policies, and then truly implement them. The recently launched U.S. Government Approach on Business and Human Rights articulates what we think companies should know when it comes to responsible business conduct in their global operations. We believe strongly this does not mean steering business away from potentially difficult regions but rather ensuring that sourcing in these areas happens in a responsible way that promotes development, rather than fueling human rights abuse or other issues.

As you have referred a few times, there is often a concern that moving toward responsible sourcing automatically means moving away from certain areas, usually those involving small “artisanal” miners. What is the State Department doing to ensure that diamonds improve the well being of artisanal miners and their communities?

This was a significant focus during our tenure as chair of the KP in 2012. In the first half of the year we worked with the World Bank, the Diamond Development Initiative and the U.S. Agency for International Development to sponsor the first-ever KP-focused development conference. We then worked closely with Angola, which chairs the KP’s Working Group on Artisanal and Alluvial Production and South Africa to craft the “Washington Declaration,” which recommitted the KP to a number of policy goals concerning economic development in the artisanal mining sector. We are hosting a workshop at the next KP meeting in South Africa to discuss the design and application of a self-assessment tool, which will enable countries to better understand what the development needs in the artisanal mining sector.

More specifically, the State Department, USAID and the U.S. Geological Survey have undertaken efforts to promote the formalization of artisanal mining and sustainability of such mining as a livelihood. The focus is on property rights and land tenure and improved understanding of the geologic deposits that miners are exploiting.

Why? The answer is easy – imports.

That might not come as a big surprise to most. NRF has argued for years that imported merchandise lets retailers provide American families with the high-quality products they demand at the prices they can afford.

What might be surprising, however, is that imports also help create U.S. jobs. A total of 16 million American jobs – including 1.8 million in retail alone – are tied to imports. That amounts to 9 percent of U.S. employment.

Those statistics and more come from “Imports Work for America,” a new study conducted for NRF, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Consumer Electronics Association and the American Apparel and Footwear Association. Written by economists Laura Baughman and Joseph Francois of the Trade Partnership Worldwide, the study is being released as part of “Imports Work Week” to help draw attention to the important role imports play in the United States and global economy.

Among other things, the study shows that imports aren’t just about retailers and consumers. U.S. manufactures rely on imported inputs to production and raw materials to make many of the goods they export around the world. And on the flip side, many imported finished products include Made-in-the-USA components.

And while importers are often portrayed as big businesses, it turns out that more than half of U.S. importers are small businesses.

This study is an important read for anyone interested in the retail supply chain and international trade.  It provides an important view as to why imports are not as bad as some make them out to be. Imports help drive the U.S. economy and employment just as much as exports, and often times help to drive U.S. exports to overseas markets.

NRF and other leading supply chain stakeholders have repeatedly called on the ILA and USMX to stay at the negotiation table until a new, long-term deal is struck. This has also included appeals to President Obama to invoke the authority of the Taft-Hartley Act to prevent a costly coast-wide shutdown. Those calls for the Administration to intervene will once again be raised if the two sides fail to reach an agreement this week during yet another round of talks.

While the ILA and the USMX have continued to meet regularly – with the assistance of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service – it is now time for the parties to reach a new deal in order to bring much-needed stability and predictability to operations along the East and Gulf Coast ports.

The continued threat of a coast-wide port shutdown has wreaked havoc on the supply chain for the past year for the nation’s retailers, manufacturers, farmers, importers, exporters, and others who rely on the ports to move commerce. These groups have had to continuously prepare for a supply chain disruption and have implemented costly contingency plans to ensure their products reach market, be it cars on the showroom floor or shirts on the store shelf. These emergency protocols to reroute goods and merchandise continue to come at significant costs to U.S. businesses, which invariably impacts American consumers.

Ports play a critical role in our economy, and the ability to move commerce along the global supply chain is critical for U.S. global competitiveness. Any disruption, either man-made (port shutdown) or not (Hurricane Sandy), significantly impacts America’s stature in the global marketplace. Take the 2002 West Coast port lockout for example. That lockout, which lasted 10 days until President Bush invoked Taft-Hartley, cost the economy $1 billion a day and took over six months to recover. A similar shutdown along the East Coast and Gulf Coast ports could have an even greater impact on today’s economy since these 14 ports are responsible for roughly 45 percent of all U.S. trade.

The only way the two sides can reach a deal is if they remain at the table. Under no circumstance should the ILA and the USMX leave the negotiations until a final, long-term contact is reached and plans for quick ratification are approved. Hopefully it doesn’t come to that, but we all need to be prepared if another coast-wide port strike can’t be averted.

According to Sterneckert and Suleski, retailers are faced with many challenges today. These include an increasingly empowered and well-connected consumer, continued economic uncertainty impacting consumers’ buying decisions, increased pressure from pure-play retailers, and continuously evolving supply chains focused on exploring different ways to get products to consumers.

Today’s supply chain leaders must be demand-driven and combine demand, supply and product to support one another instead of focusing on them as separate initiatives. The “Demand-Driven Retail” (DDR) strategy for the Supply Chain Top 25 includes a focus on the following:

1. Understanding and responding to demand signals
2. Delivering a consumer-centric supply chain
3. Fulfilling cross-channel demand
4. Building value networks
5. Using the supply chain to support products and services innovation

Retailers wanting to become global leaders need to conduct a demand-driven supply chain action plan. Companies should first take the DDR self-assessment to gauge their current maturity levels. Within 90 days, companies should determine the role of their supply chain and how it should enable their business strategy. They should also create and administer a supply chain skill set assessment. Finally, within the next 12 months, companies need to compare their DDR initiatives to the recommended list and create a DDR process and technology road map.

The new rule is a bit complicated but the ramifications are severe and will surely be felt on America’s roadways and throughout the retail industry supply chain.

The new rule retained the 11-hour daily driving limit for truck drivers but altered the weekly restart provision to include two consecutive nights off for every driver and a mandatory rest break for truck drivers within the first eight hours of driving. While NRF was pleased with the decision to retain the 11-hour daily driving limit, we are extremely concerned with the mandatory two consecutive nights included in the restart provision.

NRF believes that these changes will drive up retailer transportation costs and make trucking less safe due to the fact that more trucks will have to be added onto our already congested roadways to make up for those drivers on mandatory breaks. NRF also contends that the FMCSA failed to truly recognize the importance of nighttime driving and early morning deliveries. As we all know, many retailers rely upon nighttime driving and early morning deliveries as a way to keep costs down and trucks off the road during peak driving times to reduce congestion with passenger vehicles.

NRF’s concerns with the new HOS rule is supported by the supply chain community, including the American Trucking Associations and the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, who contend that the rule would not improve safety (as intended) but potentially make trucking less safe because more trucks would have to be added on the roads during the busiest daytime hours in order to make up for lost productivity and reduced driving times.

NRF submitted comments to the FMCSA during the rulemaking process to explain the negative impact the proposed changes would have on the retail industry. In fact, an NRF member, Badcock Home Furnishing traveled to Washington, D.C. to testify at a Congressional hearing on how the proposed rule would negatively impact their retail business.

Even though the new rule has been published it will not become effective until July 2013, so retailers, transportation providers and others have time to challenge the rule in court or adjust their logistics plans accordingly.

Supported by good leadership, retailers are rising to the challenge, juggling the priorities of ensuring supply chain efficiency with various regulatory requirements and corporate social responsibility initiatives.

National Retail Federation recently welcomed Dennis Cohen, Senior Director of Direct Import/Own Brand Supply Chain at Office Depot, as the new chairman of the NRF Strategic Supply Chain Council.

We talked with Dennis about the challenges and opportunities facing the supply chain community, the importance of sharing professional insights with your peers and what the council is planning for the 2012 NRF Global Supply Chain Summit, May 6 to 8 in Atlanta, Ga.

Congratulations on becoming the new chair of the NRF Strategic Supply Chain Council. What are your goals as the new head of this council?

A primary goal is to increase participation in the variety of supply chain oriented activities that NRF offers to its members. As current participants know, hearing from industry experts and peers on key industry issues provides valuable insight into running their respective businesses.

What value do you think NRF brings to the supply chain community?

NRF gives visibility and objective analysis of upcoming and current macro issues and regulations facing the supply chain community. It helps frame possible impact to members’ businesses and assists in formulating appropriate responses. When needed, NRF provides a collective voice to persuade policy makers in situations where individual retailers may not have the time or resources to be heard.

What are most prevalent challenges facing supply chain executives today?

At this time, supply chain executive challenges are a function of the state of their particular businesses. There is a wide range of enterprise performance in the global economy and that is reflected across the US retail sector. Executives need to find the right balance of meeting customer expectations, working capital investment, and cost management to enable adequate return on supply chain assets to fuel growth for their shareholders.

NRF has heard from a number of its members about the ever growing number of regulatory requirements being placed on importers and other entities within the supply chain. Do you see this as a growing issue?

While there were a lot of diverse regulatory constraints legislated over last five years, I see the trend slowing in the US. Primary reasons are the upcoming elections and condition of the economy. I do see a risk in states implementing localized regulations in the hopes of generating revenue or furthering local political agendas. Internationally, there will continue to be a smattering of country specific requirements as they develop.

What opportunities or challenges do you see in the area of corporate social responsibility?

A primary opportunity is to consolidate individual compliance efforts into a recognized and credible single standard. There is opportunity to speed this process by improving the partnership between governments, retailers, and factories. Challenges in corporate social responsibility continue to center around the retail industry’s consensus agreement on standards, transparency, and certified measurement.

Technology continues to play an important role within the supply chain. Are there any new technologies that are creating a buzz within the community?

Advances in supply chain technology applications are tending to be evolutionary, while revolutionary solutions continue to be elusive. We’re seeing new solutions utilizing cloud computing, smart phone and tablet technology. Matching the right technology and investment to the particular retailer’s business situation will remain vital.

Tell us a little bit about your experience at NRF’s inaugural Global Supply Chain Summit last spring.

The summit provided in-depth forums on very topical supply chain business issues. The access we had to experts and thorough discussions and debates with peers was extremely beneficial. I brought several ideas back to be implemented.

What are you most looking forward to at the 2012 Summit in Atlanta?

I look forward to learning what’s next on the horizon in areas that could benefit my business. I also look forward to interacting with another great mix of industry and management experts.

For more information about the 2012 NRF Global Supply Chain Summit, visit www.nrf.com/supplychain12.

If freight railroad companies and a handful of unions don’t agree on an extension to the “cooling off” period or reach agreement on a new deal by midnight December 6, the rail labor groups could go on strike and shut down the nation’s rail system.

There’s no doubt that a strike or work stoppage could have serious, adverse effects on retailers and consumers this holiday shopping season. Even a one-day strike, stoppage or slow-down could severely backlog the entire nationwide supply chain system for weeks delaying shipments, overloading other transport modes and even impacting holiday shipping deadlines. In fact, the railroads estimate that a rail strike could cost the economy $2 billion a day!

A potential strike couldn’t happen at a worse time for retailers as the positive momentum surrounding Black Friday and Cyber Monday sales have lifted the stock market and – most importantly – the confidence and spirits of consumers and businesses.

NRF is extremely concerned that a national freight rail strike is imminent and has been proactively urging the two sides to reach a deal by December 6, or at a minimum extend the “cooling off” period in order to reach a new agreement. Last week we sent a letter to Congress asking lawmakers to be prepared to step in if railroad unions go on strike.

Specifically, NRF is calling on Congress and the Administration to pass necessary legislation to prevent a strike and implement the recommendations of the Presidential Emergency Board (PEB), which provided settlement recommendations on November 6. There are positive signs that Congress is listening and understands the ramifications of a potential strike.

In fact, House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, along with House Majority Eric Cantor, R-Virginia, and House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy, R-California, released the following draft bill text and this statement:

While our hope is that the parties involved will find common ground and resolve the situation without congressional involvement, the House is prepared to take legislative action in the days ahead to avert a job-destroying shutdown of our nation’s railroads, in the event such legislation proves necessary.

House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee Chairman John Mica, R-Florida introduced H.J.Res 91 to implement the PEB recommendations.  In addition, Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyoming, introduced S.J.Res 32 to do the same.  Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, also introduced resolutions to extend the “cooling off” period to avert a potential strike.

We wholeheartedly agree with these congressional actions and are holding out hope that both sides negotiate in good faith to find a common solution (without federal interference) but NRF stands by its urgent calls for Congress and the Administration to step in to prevent a nationwide rail strike.

While a rail strike would always be detrimental to retailers, in this case the timing couldn’t be worse.

It may sound like a fantasy, but this could easily become reality.

Believe it or not, the answer is as simple as speeding up the process by which it approves visas for business and leisure travelers who want to come to the U.S. to shop. Rapidly growing economies such as China, India and Brazil are creating millions of new affluent consumers, which U.S. retailers are coveting. The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post and the CBS Early Show (video below) have all identified this important economic issue and the positive impact these shoppers could have on the U.S. economy.

Unfortunately, the U.S. has lost a significant portion of international travel because of long delays in the U.S. visa process. Due to the fact that the U.S. State Department requires visa applicants submit to an interview, massive visa backlogs have been produced. In China, it can take up to 120 days to get a U.S. visa. In Brazil it can take up to 145 days. These delays prompt foreign tourists and consumers to go elsewhere. Last year alone, 38% of Chinese tourists went to Europe while only 13% came to the U.S.

The average foreign tourist spends $3,692 while in the United States, with an average of $1,063 going to shopping, according to a study by the Commerce Department and the travel industry. A separate study found the average Chinese tourist spends $6,243 overall, while the average Brazilian spends $4,940.

To highlight the importance of foreign shoppers and visa reform, NRF has joined with the Discovering America Partnership to ask the State Department to provide sufficient staffing and other resources to reduce the wait time for a visa interview to 10 days in Brazil, China and India. Studies show that doing so would attract an additional 98 million visitors, create 1.3 million new U.S. jobs and inject an estimated $859 billion into the U.S. economy.

Several bills have been introduced in Congress to address the visa situation. Representative Joe Heck, R-Nev. has introduced the “Welcoming Business Travelers and Tourists to America Act of 2011,” which sets a standard that requires the State Department to process visas within 12 days, and to implement a program that utilizes videoconferencing technology for conducting visa interviews. Senators Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn. and Roy Blunt, R-Mo. have introduced the “International Tourism Facilitation Act,” which would require the State Department to use its consular resources more effectively to better respond to the rising international travel demand.

NRF will continue to work with the State Department, business allies and supporters on Capitol Hill to ensure that more foreign visitors eager to visit America can safely enter the U.S. and enjoy all that we have to offer – creating jobs for Americans in the process.

It might sound like a fairy tale, but there’s no question that U.S. retailers – and the economy – would see a boom in sales if visa reform became a reality.