Responsible Alpaca Standard International Working Group Call

Call 8: RAS 1.0 Launch and Industry Update25 March 2021

Anti-Trust Statement

Textile Exchange convenes the textile community and values diversity of views, expertise, opinions,

backgrounds, and experiences. It is expected that members of this community will collaborate by sharing ideas, information, and resources of publicly available

information only and avoid discussions on price, strategic plans or other private and sensitive information.

Chatham House Rule

“When a meeting, or part thereof, is held under the Chatham House Rule, participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity not the

affiliation of the speaker(s), not that of any other participant, may be revealed.”

Agenda

Voting Results

RAS 1.0 + User Guide

Communal Pilot and Certification Procedures

Industry Update: ASCALPE, COOPECAN, Michell, Inca Group

Adoption Support

Next Steps and Q&A

Process and Voting Results

RAS Development Process

No. Topic Date1 Kick off – Introduction to the Process June 24th, 20202 Animal Welfare – Nutrition & Living Environment July 22nd, 20203 Animal Welfare – Animal Management August 26th, 20204 Animal Welfare – Animal Management September 23rd, 20205 Implementation – Farmer Perspective & MSHF Module *Tuesday - September

29th, 20206 Land Management – Land Management October 21st, 20207 Social Module, Certification procedures November 18th, 20208 RAS Launch and Industry Adoption March 25th, 2021

New! RAF IWG Joint Call May 6th, 2021New! RAS Launch Webinar – Open to Public May 12th, 2021

IWG Call scheduleAll calls are scheduled for 1-hour and will be at 9am MST/ 10am Peru/ 4pm UK

• Reached quorum = 20 voting organizations• All voted to ‘approve’ the draft

• 4 Brands and Retailers

• 4 Civil Society Members

• 3 Materials Producer

• 4 Professional Services

• 5 Supply Chain Members

Voting Results

RAS 1.0 + RAS User Guide

• Minimum weaning age increased following review comments from 12 weeks to 36 weeks.

• No need for standard on ensuring cria/mother bond is established before castration occurs as if castration takes place the operation is carried out at much older ages than for sheep or goats.

RAS 1.0

• Examples of audit points, templates and the supporting templates

• Added wording in the handling section to reinforce intent around welfare management

• Desired outcome focused, no need to build new infrastructure on farm if the desired outcomes around animal welfare are being met.

• Knife Slaughter exemption

• Communal farmer group templates and assessments

RAS 1.0 User Guide

Communal Farmer Pilot AuditCertification Procedures

Pilot audits have been carried out in India to test the adapted audit protocol using an Animal Based Assessment based on the AWIN protocol.

The approach is being developed to apply across the Responsible Animal Fiber Standards (RWS, RMS, RAS).

The pilot audit is intended to inform the finalization of the adapted approach

Based on pilot audit findings, a different sample rate for low-risk farm groups with a small number of animals is being considered.

Communal Farmer Pilot Audit

Certification Procedures

The RAF Certification Procedures presents normative requirements for accreditation bodies and certification bodies which are specific to the Responsible Animal fiber Standard.

These requirements are in addition to the requirements for all Textile Exchange standards, which can be found in ASR-101 Accreditation and Certification Procedures for Textile Exchange Standards.

Section A - General InformationSection B – ReferencesSection C - Requirements for Accreditation BodiesSection D - Requirements for Certification Bodies

The RAF Certification Procedures will be updated to include the Responsible Alpaca Standard and the Communal Farmer group certification model.

Industry UpdateASCALPE, COOPECAN, Michell, Inca Group

RAS – Implementation Proposal

Arequipa, March 2021

Contents

1. Complex Situation in the Breeding

Sector

2. Value Chain Commitment with RAS

3. RAS Implementation Proposal

4. Conclusions & Recommendations

1. Complex situation in the Alpaca BreedingSector

ü A rugged & wild ecosystem

ü Atomized & scattered breeders

ü Limited Access to basic services: Education, Health, Energy & Connectivity

ü Breeders over 60+ y.o.

ü Low technical breeding level

ü Limited investment capacity

ü Millenian activity & Andean cosmovision

1. Complex situation of the breeding sectorThere are 82,459 Alpaca Breeding Units in Peru, classified in 9 blocks

10,138

Source: Cenagro 2012

2. Value chain commitment with animal welfare(RAS)

ü There is full engagementü Promote and lead the processü RAS is on top of the National

Alpaca agenda :ü Mesa Nacional de la Alpacaü CONALPACAü CTN del INACAL

ü Public & Private sectors are working together

3. RAS Implementation proposal

3.1. Allies

3.2. Implementation Stages

3.4. Budget Estimates

§ Textil Exchange§ Alpaca Textile Industry & comercial chain§ Individual,Small breeders (Assoc & Co-ops )§ Ministries :

• Agriculture/Animal Husbandry • Production /CITES programs• Tourism/PROMPERU

§ International Brands interested in sustainability and animal welfare

§ Mining sector with Alpaca projects

3. RAS implementation proposal3.1. Allies considered for RAS implementation

3. RAS Implementation Proposal

§ Local & International Universities : UNALM, UNSAC, UNA, UNDAC, UCSM, UPM – UCM (Spain)

§ Alpaca Projects from Regional & Local Governments

§ NGOs working with the Alpaca Sector§ Mesa Nacional de la Alpaca § CONALPACA

3.1. Allies considered for RAS implementation

Distribution of the Largest Alpaca Breeding units in Peru

3.2. RAS implementation stages

3. RAS Implementation Proposal

FOCUSEDFARMS

12% of the Total P.U. 55% of the Total Peruvian Reported

Alpacas

Estimated Certifiable Fiber in a 5 year period

3.2. RAS implementation stages

3. RAS Implementation Proposal

5 Year Implementation Projections by Stages

3. RAS Implementation Proposal3.2. RAS implementation stages

3. RAS Implementation Proposal3.4. Budget Estimates

Yearly Estimated Implementation Budget Summary (US$)

3. RAS Implementation Proposal3.4. Budget EstimatesYearly Investment for certified Units (US$)

4. Conclusions & Recommendations

• Considering the complexity of the Peruvian Alpaca BreedingSector, this will be a challenge and a milestone.

• We reasure our commitment to lead, promote and implement theRAS.

• Economical and active support from different stakeholders linkedto our sector is key for the undertaking and success of the RAS.

• Total transparency in the technical, and finantial mangement ofthe RAS implementation is guarranteed.

Thank you!!!

Adoption Support

• RAS Commitment Claim Sign-Up• RAS Commitment Claims are allowed • Public facing commitment OKà general marketing (not

product-specific, i.e. hangtags, webpages, etc).• Can use the RAS logo without CB approval• Example of allowed language:

• XYZ brand commits to source X% of our alpaca fiber from Responsible Alpaca Standard certified sources by year X.

• XYZ brand commits to achieve Responsible Alpaca Standard certification at X% of our suppliers by year X.

Public Facing Commitments

• Board of advisors that work with ASCALPE • collect and distribute resources for implementation: funding,

educational materials, research guidance, vet services, capacity building, breeding resources, radio campaigns etc.

• Advisor group made up of producers, key stakeholder processors, Peruvian Universities, Government Branches, and Textile Exchange.

• Advising on fund management and resource distribution.• Channel for direct funding for capacity building on-farm

• We are looking for brand/retailer/supply chain engagement! Invest in RAS supply.

• If you’re interested in funding RAS projects please reach out. Callie will email with how to get involved.

Resource Commitments

Next Steps

• This group will join the RAF group (RWS/RMS stakeholders)• RAF = Responsible Animal Fiber Framework, an umbrella term for the certification model for

all pasture-based animal standards.• RAF IWG call is on May 8th

• Begin preparing for RAF supply chain certification • New supply chain sites can certify to CCS RAF scope immediately • Existing RWS supply chain sites automatically have been granted RAF scopes for this year

and are ready to receive RAS material

RAS Launch Process

q Register for the RAF on May 6th call (link on HUB)

q Register + spread the word for the RAS Launch Webinar on May 12th (link in HUB + email)

Action Items before the Next Call

Q&A

TextileExchange.org

© Copyright Notice

This presentation is protected by U.S. and International copyright laws.

Textile Exchange welcomes you to use slides from this collection for your presentations on the condition that:• The slides are not altered from the way it is presented in its original format, this includes changing colors and style.

• The Textile Exchange logo should not be removed.• Adding logos and/or content is not permitted without written permission from Textile Exchange.

• Any presentation using this content or any form of this content should acknowledge Textile Exchange as the author.

Thank you

REFERENCE SLIDES ON MSHFM

Herding Module >>> Marginalized Smallholder Farmer Module

Marginalized Smallholder Farmer Module Challenges for RAS

• Ensuring herders meet RAS standards (verifying compliance with RAS)

• Do not want to undermine/devalue RAS by certifying poor practice

• How to deal with non-compliance• Definition of “marginalized smallholder farmers”• Can marginalized smallholder farmers be organized into

groups?• Groups can assist with control systems to assess

compliance, manage risk, and document performance of their members relative to external standards

• Minimal or no land security• Land available for livestock grazing may vary season to

season/year to year• Lack of finance available for investment in new equipment or new

technology• Difficulty in accessing training and support• Difficulty in maintaining records (illiteracy, lack of access to record

keeping systems)• Lack of finance for certification fees

Marginalized Smallholder Farmer Module Challenges for the smallholder farmer

Someone who meets the following:

• Small numbers of livestock (exact maximums to be decided)• Reliance on family labour• Animal fibres are the primary source of income• Use relatively low levels of agricultural inputs and have comparatively low yields (relative to the range of

yields for the given commodity and context)• Have a relatively small land footprint• Face significant economic constraints, such as lack of capital assets and low access to finance [lack

of economies of scale]• Face significant information constraints, including lack of technical knowledge and low access to

market information• Little or no land security• Independent – not affiliated with a company for which they produce fibre.

Note: Adapted from Accountability Framework: Operational Guidance on Smallholder Inclusion in Ethical Supply Chains

Possible definition of a marginalized smallholder farmer

Helping marginalized smallholder farmers organize into groups

• With existing NGOs already working with this type of alpaca breeder/farmer

• Training for marginalized smallholder farmers to promote understanding of RAS by groups

• Certification on a group model

Keep documentation requirements to a minimum

• Group manager keeps a record of all marginalized smallholder farmers in the group and the number of alpacas they have

• Herders do not keep records, instead, outcomes are reviewed i.e. no written health and welfare plan, but group leader and/or auditor reviews alpaca health status [e.g. based on AWIN]

• Group leader/traders record alpaca fibre volumes from different breeders

Moving Forward

AWIN = Animal Welfare INdicators Project

RWS standard AW3.2 says The producer shall have a written management plan for flock health and animal welfare.

Alternative assessments adapted from AWIN sheep/goats under their health category could include:

Absence of Injury Absence of disease

Body and head lesions Lameness

Leg injuries Faecal soiling

Mucosa colour

Ocular discharge

Respiratory quality

Fibre quality

AWIN provides information on number of animals to score, how to score and photo guidance for indicators

Outcome assessments in place of a plan

Land Management

• Marginalized smallholder farmers less likely (through economic constraints) to use pesticides/fertilisers (so low risk for non-compliance with these standards)

• Group leaders can identify local or regional soil health risks e.g. erosion

• Predation risk assessed by group with promotion of non-lethal control e.g. guardian dogs (already in use in some areas)

• Land management in general will be covered in more detail on our next call.

Moving Forward

Accountability Framework Operational Guidance on Smallholder Inclusion in Ethical Supply Chains suggests that when non-compliances are found

• Tight timelines for individual non-compliances may not be the most suitable method to encourage compliance. Instead:• Focus on continuous improvement• Decide what support should be provided to facilitate such improvement• Decide at what point non-compliant suppliers must be suspended/excluded

The Accountability Framework goes on to suggest that groups of marginalized smallholder farmers could gain or retain certification when non-compliances are found if:• Groups are managing their members effectively to prevent future non-compliance or are taking adequate steps to do so within a

short period of time.• Groups are mainly or largely in compliance with standards requirements or have demonstrated substantive progress towards

this goal.• The intensity, extent, and persistence of non-compliances are great enough to clearly warrant suspension or exclusion

Non-compliance and Marginalized Smallholder Farmers

Possible options

• Critical compliance issues are addressed immediately before certification can be granted/renewed

• Major and Minor compliance issues• The group leader presents an acceptable plan and timescale to work with marginalized smallholder farmers to

resolve these.• Major non-compliances are addressed first – and the plan to resolve non-compliances must cover all Major NCs• Groups could be allowed longer than the current RAF timelines for resolving major and minor compliance issues• A minimum percentage of minor non-compliances that must be met for certification to be granted could be set.

For example the Responsible Down Standard version 2.0 had a requirement of at least 50% minor requirements per module met for certification to proceed

• Progress towards compliance must be regularly reported to the certification body and Textile Exchange.

Non-compliance and Marginalized Smallholder Farmers