RSPO RT12: Eye on resolutions (update 3a) - at the General Assembly,declaration of mills and ACOP reporting; 5.15pm

Note: Declaration of mills is a biggie! This sets stage for differentiation within certification and alters balances. 

20 November 2014 - at the General Assembly, declaration of mills and ACOP reporting; 5.15pm

Resolution: Declaration of mills.  Proposed by Unilever. To promote transparency, buyer has right to know which palm oil mills (and plantations) and PK crushers RSPO certified product comes from. This would help market transformation. Mass balance would be struggle, Unilever has identified 1800 mills in its supply chain and added information is needed.

Arguments against: This seems to make sense for non-certified product. But within certified sphere, this would create tiers of mills. IP and SG could be used instead (but even in SG trader might not provide information on mills; need this information to build roadmaps to increase origins to targeted). If you know mills beforehand, you can choose from whom to buy and this is not fair to RSPO members (in off-market deals you can ask for declarations of plantations; without transparency, hard to know whom to work with). Agropalma can be IP entirely. By tracing everything how does this affect MB? What is intention going forward with this added information - rather than buying from scattered pool of certified segregated, then will support identified mills and companies in supply base?

Supporting argument: With PalmGHG, let buyer decide which mill to buy from, lower versus higher emissions. Those with lower emissions has better market potential and price than those with higher emissions. An incentive for growers improve. Univanich supports this that mills that have gone beyond RSPO requirements can be recognized when selling Greenpalm certificates.

Outcome: 96 for 84 against. This was a tighter vote. Resolution passed.


Resolution: Change ACOP reporting period to calendar year and improve the ACOP. Proposed by German retailers.  Alignment to calendar year for consistency and reduce work load for most. Improved ACOP can do with more guidance to improve its quality - better explanation and terminology clarification. It is useful to have macro information to understand market progress and tipping point indicators.

Arguments against: Current period is 2-3 months lag on reporting and for Roundtable would end up with older data than what is current and might miss fast developments. Separately, what to do with the non-ACOP reporting members? Tighten to end of April, to accommodate March deadline for certificates.

Outcome: 131 for. Resolution accepted.


20 November 2014 - at the General Assembly, allow wider usage of RSPO trademark by non-SCCS members; 4.25pm

Resolution: Allow members not required to obtain supply chain certification to use trademark on pack. Proposed by a group of retailers. Covers cases where retailer own brand products made by OEM do not get limited by manufacturer permitting their information on pack and/or retailer not to disclose supplier. Asks RSPO to look into easing this usage limitation.

Arguments against: Taskforce is already discussing this, so we do not need this resolution at this time (proposer replies wants to prioritise this, a non-controversial issue, and get wider feedback from members on this). Risk that this might limit the work of the Taskforce (especially if rejected) - it should be left free to look at all possibilities.

Outcome: Request Taskforce look into this, and withdraw resolution.


20 November 2014 - at the General Assembly, seeking non-membership (avoids reporting) for small users; 4.10pm

 

Resolution: Supermarket retailers are making a case for small users of palm oil not to require RSPO membership while still allowing them to be supply-chain certified. The retailers report that 80% of volume with top 20 suppliers - own brand products by retailers; the rest average 5 tonnes palm oil per annum. They note it takes weeks or months to join RSPO and have to report ACOP and  other problems. September 2014, 606 Supply Chain Associates use less than 500 metric tonnes. If they do not renew it is 3% of RSPO membership income budget. Reduce burden on those with complex supply chains and low volume usage - they find reporting complicated and using many other ingredients.

• Example 1: A supplier makes 6 x M&S cheesecakes - palm oil use = 13 tonnes/year. Palm oil footprint = 4.77 tonnes/year. Ingredients: cake margarine 0.99 tonnes/year, Arobake 1.82 tonnes/year, Digestive biscuit buttons 1.89 tonnes/year, paprika extract 0.01 t/year, Aeroplus duo 0.06 tonnes/year
• Example 2: Supplier makes 11 different Ahold products (palm oil use = 89 tonnes / year). Product palm oil footprint 0.8 tonnes/year. Palm oil content 5%, 10.5 grams of palm oil per box. Many ingredients including fractionated PKO in vanilla yoghurt coating, and PKO in peanut coating.

Arguments against: This would lose information from these producers who use less than 500 tonnes. At the other end, grower smallholders have to be members and also go through tedious works and efforts in the P&C. Not fair to run away from the system. Compromises spirit of equality and fairness. 5 tonnes for cheesecake is equivalent to 2 hectares is same as smallholder farmer; his commitment should be matched as small user. Worrying signal on lower transparency. Concern that the high 500 tonnes bar encompasses so many RSPO members.

 

Outcome: Resolution withdrawn and request Board to look into it. 

 

 

19 November 2014 - mill risk zoning, info disclosure, ACOP, non-members, suspension

 

Start of Day 2. First chat with a downstream specialist. Concern on resolution to include mill and more info in RSPO systems. This would shift from a binary certified vs non-certified status of mills to open up to more nuance of mill and supply base attributes and logically to perceived risk status (traffic light labelling of mills).
 

Others are also concerned on resolution with info disclosure on both eTrace and Greenpalm to mill and beyond. But at the other end of the supply chain with a resolution for non -members to become chain of custody certified; does this mean they would be part of ACOP (which has a resolution to be strengthened) or not (if not asymmetry of information might grow with a lot more required from the upstream).
 

Also a resolution to empower the Sec Gen to have power to suspend members on recommendation of the Board. Suspensions on the mind?

 

 

RSPO RT12: On social and labour issues

We did not attend at these sessions yesterday but thanks to a reader for highlighting key issues:

a) A new Labour Working Group is being set up. This is expected to work on ultimately getting company-level worker collective bargaining in place.

b) In social assessments a new approach will come about. We think this will come to inform Compensation Liability on social issues. Currently only monetary and non monetary values and methods are set for environmental concerns.

We'll update as we hear and learn more. Likely these will be hot implementation topics to come as they get fleshed out. As ever, the devil is in the administration details.

RSPO RT12: David Suzuki – on human overconsumption, the need for diversity, local knowledge of sustainability, risks of monoculture, over fixation on the market economy

Dr David Suzuki of UBC – on human overconsumption, the need for diversity, local knowledge of sustainability, risks of monoculture, over fixation on the market economy

Problem of consumption driven by appetite for stuff is amplifying our ecological footprint. Our numbers, technological power, consumptive power and global economy makes this the Anthropocene epoch – where our species undermines the support systems of the planet. Man’s brain invented an idea called “the future” – we are the only animal who can deliberately avoid danger and seek opportunity– this foresight allowed humans to survive and make us the planet’s dominant animal. We are the factor affecting the earth. We are heading down a dangerous path.

Half of Nobel Prize winning scientists alerted us and the press ignored it. The scientists warned that if not checked, our current practices puts at risk what we wish for the future of human society - fundamental changes are needed to avoid the collision – atmosphere, water, forest, species, over population etc. No more than one or a few decades for our chance to avert these threats will be lost.

Diversity is important. At level of the species there is diversity – genetic polymorphism. Species that thrive have inbuilt level of diversity, not homogeneity. This is part of life’s reliance. At ecosystem level, the more diversity, the more resilient it is. As conditions around the world change, there is a diverse pool.

Diversity should be built into everything we do. Sustain that diversity. Monoculture over large renders any group vulnerable to change – climate, new pests and disease. It is a great threat to long term resilience and survival of live.

For 95% of human existence, we were nomadic hunter gatherers. You are utterly dependent on nature for your survival and well-being. As humans spread across the planet, we brought extinction with it. Humans extinguished woolly mammoths and more, even with simple tools.

Indigenous knowledge is based on place – hard won practical experience accumulated over long periods of time. This is priceless knowledge of how to live in that place. Priceless as it cannot be duplicated by science. Hard won knowledge on how to survive from year to year. So much loss of what was known – a lot of it had to do with sustainability. Diversity in this ethnosphere helped humans survive. But now we are monocultured around the planet with a narrow knowledge base.

In history, most humans were farmers and they know about weather, pollination, nitrogen fixing plants and they are embedded in nature. From 1900, and amazing change. World population tripled to 6 billion in 2000. Huge cities and many cities. Transformation from village farming animal to a big city dweller. You can spend days and weeks not going outdoors. In a city, our perception of nature changes – who needs that? You just need a job. Then the economy becomes the highest priority. Thus, the Canada Prime Minister says you cannot do anything about GHG emissions, it will spoil the economy. Elevating the economy above all.

CEO of logging company asked “are environmentalists” willing to pay for the trees. So long as you argue within an economic framework. The real reason for fighting on the forest was not on services for humans i.e. pulp and paper versus alternative income form berries, flower arrangement and maybe a cure for cancer? Ecological services are mere economic externalities. Environmentalists have failed to shift the frame set by economics.

If you’ve to breathe polluted air, you’ll get sick. You need clean water. Bottled water from Europe in Malaysia? That should be criminal! Food and soil are high priorities too. Then whether you’re in oil palm or oil; how you do it should not undermine these foundations for life.

You live in a world constrained by laws of sciences and we live within it. Remember we are animals, we are subject to laws of carrying capacity of ecosystems. We have exceeded our biosphere by consuming the way we are. We are taking away from what rightly belongs to our children and grandchildren by over consuming.

Capitalism and the market economy. We invented these things! We can change these things so they conform to laws set by the natural world. Some see a forest as a sacred grove, rivers as a circulatory system – others see it as pulp and paper, irrigation system etc. Is the earth our mother or the mother lode?

Note: a cautionary view on the global free marketism approach including consumerism and global supply chains for processed products!

Call for higher palm oil promo spend?

FYI some comparative stats on Malaysia palm oil versus US agriculture promotional spending........ "The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) in promoting American agriculture produce spends close to 1% of its total exports. In 2013, USDA data recorded USD 144 billion in export sales with USD1.3 billion spent on promotional marketing of such exports. If we use the USDA spend rate of 1% as a guide, the Ministry should spend about RM800 million a year to defend and promote palm oil, not a mere RM24.5 million. As such, we urge the Ministry to increase its spending to a more reasonable amount of RM200 million a year to turnaround and safeguard the future of this very important industry...."

Newslinks:

PKR rep cries foul over oil palm budget slash BY EILEEN NG Published: 18 November 2014
"Wong Chen (PKR-Kelana Jaya) said the Ministry of Plantation Industries and Commodities cut the budget for the promotion and defence of the commodity by 40%, from RM16 million this year to RM10 million next year. Also, the Malaysian Palm Oil Board (MPOB)'s budget also saw a decrease from RM25 million this year to RM14.5 million in 2015.... Wong said on an overall level, the ministry only allocated a "mere" RM24.5 million to defend and promote oil palm. "Palm oil is a RM80 billion export industry. To spend a mere RM24.5 million to defend and promote palm oil is a joke. RM24.5 million represents a mere 0.03% of total exports of palm oil," he said at a press conference in parliament today...." http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/pkr-rep-cries-foul-over-oil-palm-budget-slash#sthash.wltkdmRc.dpuf

Defend national palm oil, increase budget allocation, urge Pakatan MPs BY PATHMA SUBRAMANIAMNovember 18, 2014; http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/defend-national-palm-oil-increase-budget-allocation-urge-pakatan-mps#sthash.UYsszKKU.dpuf

Press conference video here: http://www.kinitv.com/video/12888O8

RSPO RT12: On Compensation Liability and riparian reserves (update 1)

On Compensation Liability: RSPO reported that 35 companies submitted with 7 providing on LUC analysis. Observers ask if the previously cited $2500/hectare figure has now shifted to the higher end of $3000/hectare. Darrel Webber cites 280,000 hectares (globally) needs to be compensated.....

On riparian reserve remediation: These need to be 5 meters wide along small waterways. You need to measure at maximum width of the channel (ie. just before it floods, not the regular water's width). In some areas a wider reserve is appropriate if the waterway is upstream of communities (i.e. HCV 5) then the reserve width should 15-30 meters.

In areas of regular and extended flooding, the new RPSP P&C 2013 says there should be a review of suitable areas for planting. Thus, such areas should be left as natural vegetation.

Artificial waterways need not have a reserve. But since good water and soil management needed, for small channels which can transport pollution to natural waterways, there has to be reduced spraying of agro-chemicals within 10-15 meters of the edge of drainage channels linked to such natural water ways. Site planning should also reduce disconnected riparian zones which expand the risk of water pollution.

Restoration of degraded habitats.....