developing standards for responsible soy: lessons from other criteria and indicator development...
TRANSCRIPT
ProF
ores
t
Developing Standards for Responsible Soy:
Lessons from other criteria and indicator development processes
RTRS General Assembly , Sao Paulo, Brazil. May 8, 2007
Dawn Robinson and Anders LindheProForest
ProF
ores
t
RTRS Objective:
“ a forum for developing and promoting principles,
criteria, indicators, and verification tools for responsible soy production, processing and trading”
“ Responsible soy is economically viable, socially beneficial, and environmentally appropriate”
(RTRS statutes, Nov 2006)
Lessons can be learned from other, similar initiatives.
ProF
ores
t
Sources of Practical Lessons• Palm Oil Sector
– Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO)• Forestry Sector
– Forest certification schemes [e.g. Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC)]
• Agricultural Certification– Sustainable Agriculture Network, EUREPGAP
• Organic Certification– Eg. IFOAM
• Fairtrade schemes– Eg. FLO
• Coffee– 4 Cs (common code for coffee community), Utz coffee
• Associations of voluntary verification schemes– International Social and Environmental Accreditation and Labelling
(ISEAL Alliance). Eg. Code Good Practice in standard setting.• International Standards Setting bodies
– e.g. ISO Guide 59
ProF
ores
t
Key questions in developing credible schemes
• What is ‘sustainable’ or ‘responsible’ production? (definition)
• Who decides? (participation)• Is a producer implementing
‘sustainable’/ ‘responsible’ production practices? (verification/certification)
• Is what I am buying coming from a producer implementing sustainable/ responsible practices? (product tracing)
ProF
ores
t
What are the components of a credible scheme?
• Standards or set of criteria and indicators
• Independent certification or verification
• Product traceability
• Accreditation
ProF
ores
t
Why standards are necessary
• Provide clear definition of sustainability (or responsibility)
• Provides a means of measuring improvements, performance
• Provides credibility for the sector and those involved
ProF
ores
t
What makes a credible standard setting process?
• Adequately addressing key sustainability issues:– Economic – Social– Environmental
• Implementable in practice• Development through a transparent and
consultative process • Acceptability to whole range of interested
parties
ProF
ores
t
Developing the standards or criteria
-First step in achieving credibility
-Foundation of any future verification system
ProF
ores
t
Standard-setting group
• Participation– Involving key stakeholders
• Decision making– Clear mechanism for making decisions
ensuring:• no single interest can dominate• no single interest over-ruled
• Should operate transparently• Should consult widely
ProF
ores
t
Standard Setting: The Experience of the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil
Criteria working groupBalancing interest groups
Developing standardsDefining sustainability
Implementation
Finalisation &
Adoption
Transparent and consultative process
10- Producers
5-Supply chain
5-Env & 5Soc NGOs
Review drafts
Stakeholder consultation
ProF
ores
t
Defining policy and practice: The experience of the FSC Plantation Working Group
4 environmental chamber (2 north/2 south)4 social chamber (2 north/2 south)4 economic chamber (2 north/2 south)
Balanced working group across chambers and regions
Selected by chamber members. Representatives not necessarily FSC members
System for decision making agreed up front.
All decisions taken by consensus, except 1, where voting used.
1st meeting 6 months from concept (define how and select group)
1.5 years to achieve recommendations
ProF
ores
t
Standards development: Lessons learned (1)
Formation of a Working group • adequate participation
– Geographical spread • production/processor/consumption regions
– Broad range of opinions– Representation– Either bring expertise, or directly affected by production
• the right individuals – represent other stakeholders – willing to commit to the process. Openess– Experience in standards helpful
• Clear process is important for legitimacy
ProF
ores
t
Working group dynamics• Common understandings - training on standards development • Time committment. Outside of meetings• Draw on technical expertise at relevant points• External facilitators ease process• decision making processes
– Determine and document at start– No single group should be able to dominate. – No single group should be dominated.
Content• Keep in mind practical implementability of standards• Use specialist sub-groups and expert advisors
Standards development: Lessons learned (2)
ProF
ores
t
Stakeholder input and credibility Ensure opportunities for participation:• Allow enough time for consultation on
drafts. • Respect different realities of time to
input.• Ensure translation of key documents
into relevant languages.
Standards development: Lessons learned (3)
ProF
ores
t
Standards development: Lessons learned (4)
Planning• Agree realistic timelines, including
– time for translation– public consultation periods (rec. 60 days)
• Ensure adequate resources – Face to face meetings– Translation / interpretation– Professional facilitation – Publishing of drafts on internet