Greenpeace and Rainforest Action Network Exposed Themselves in RSPO Critique
- The RSPO wants to boost the conservation elements in its standards
- The globally renown certification body for palm oil wants to leverage the High Conservation Value-High Carbon Stock (HCV-HCS) approach to protect critical ecosystems and ensure that land is developed responsibly.
- The usual bunch of critics of the RSPO from Greenpeace and Rainforest Action Network have condemned it as a weakening of standards, thereby exposing themselves as quite clueless on what the RSPO does
How on earth did Greenpeace and Rainforest Action Network get it so wrong?
Greenpeace and Rainforest Action Network from the US have predictably flapped their lips against the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) as the RSPO looks to improve standards governing its certification of palm oil production systems. In criticizing the RSPO’s plans for a “more robust standard,” the two groups have exposed themselves as completely out of touch with what happens on the ground in palm oil producing countries.
As reported by Mongabay:
However, some NGOs say the new standard could open loopholes for deforestation, notably through the RSPO’s introduction of a new definition for high-carbon stock (HCS) forest that diverges from the globally recognized HCS Approach (HCSA) toolkit.
Critics ( namely Greenpeace and Rainforest Action Network to help Hans De Jong’s vague writing ) warn that this approach may pave the way for more palm oil expansion into forests, as the RSPO definition prioritizes the carbon value of forests over their broader ecological role, potentially allowing companies to convert certain forest areas that would have been protected under the HCSA toolkit.
Under the existing standard, palm oil companies that are members of the RSPO are required to conserve biodiverse, carbon-rich forests that support local communities, using the high conservation value (HCV) and HCS Approach toolkits to identify these forest areas. In 2018, the HCV and HCSA organizations developed an integrated assessment framework that RSPO members use to guide conservation practices.
To ensure that its rules are more applicable on the ground, the RSPO’s new standard now reflects the existence of this integrated toolkit, which members should use to assess HCV and HCS areas, RSPO chief executive officer Joe D’Cruz told Mongabay.”
Can the RSPO’s new standards define sustainable palm oil better?
The RSPO's proposed new standard is not a divergence of its commitments to sustainable palm oil but a convergence of High Conservation Values with High Carbon Stock Approach.
Both Greenpeace and Rainforest Action Network despite being very vocal on the topic of RSPO certified palm oil, seem to be blissfully ignorant of what happens outside of their office walls.
The High Carbon Stock Approach (HCSA) which these two groups want the RSPO to retain in its present form has failed to deliver its grand ambitions.
The HCSA is a decent assessment tool for conservation as it demands the protection of high carbon stock areas. It became a useless tool when it attempted to look like a tool for sustainability by claiming to “impact landscapes, ecosystems and habitats, ecosystem services, community needs or cultural identity.”
Greenpeace and Rainforest Action Network staffers can hug the HCSA as they fall to sleep but the facts and figures on HCSA should bring them nightmares. Indonesia as the world’s biggest producer of palm oil and favored target of Greenpeace and Rainforest Action Network fundraising campaigns is a perfect example.
According to Statista:
The total land area of oil palm plantations in Indonesia from 2013 to 2022 is about 15.34 million hectares
Of this, the RSPO has certified sustainable palm oil production areas in Indonesia of less than 25%.
What does this mean in terms of sticking to a failed no deforestation no peat palm oil piece of paper on Indonesia?
Let me spell this out in plain words for Grant Rosoman and Gemma Tillack. The RSPO’s impact on Indonesia’s palm oil production has stagnated at less than 25 percent of total areas under palm oil plantations in Indonesia. This stagnation of RSPO impact on the ground has gone on for years. Rosoman and Tillack should be well aware of it unless they had their head stuck in some other money making “save the forests” fight in other countries.
The saddest fact about the RSPO is that its members represent 42% of global palm oil production but the RSPO could only certify 20% of that.
The news gets worse for Rosoman and Tillack with their poor understanding of what the RSPO wants to do with the HCSA
Four majors in the palm oil industry, Wilmar International, Golden Agri Resources, Sime Darby( newly renamed SD Guthrie) and IOI Corporation Berhad have already quit the HCSA committee.
Did this doom Indonesian forests because RSPO majors walked away from HCSA?
Clearly no.
Indonesia is a global leader in reducing deforestation – now with the lowest reported levels in 20 years. To recognize Indonesia’s impressive results, Norway announced a contribution of 100 million US dollars to support the country’s continuous efforts.
The U.S. and Indonesia Signed Landmark Agreement in Support of Indonesia’s Forestry and Land Use Goals.
The breadth and depth of these G2G programs is what the RSPO needs to strive towards. Having a lonely plantation here and there that subscribed to the HCSA is completely meaningless in terms of a sustainable landscape.
But getting back to the HCSA version held so dear by Greenpeace and Rainforest Action Network. Rosoman and Gillack are obviously unaware of the socio-economic dynamics in Indonesia. These guys with their loose lips and idle hands should do some research into protected areas and their impact on landscapes, ecosystems and habitats, ecosystem services, community needs or cultural identity.
From Gunung Palung National Park in West Kalimantan to Rainforest Action Network’s pet project in Gunung Leuser National Park, both of which are sold in fundraising campaigns as orangutan habitats and high carbon areas, even legal protection under Indonesian law has failed to protect these areas from illegal deforestation.
What makes Greenpeace or Rainforest Action Network think the half-dead HCSA would have made a difference? Identifying high conservation value or high carbon stock areas are a no-brainer for conservation groups which have no skin in the game except for their own raison d'etre in getting a paycheque.
Will Grant Rosoman’s paycheque from Greenpeace save more forests or the RSPO’s proposal to embed HCSA into its main framework for sustainable palm oil?
The Big Challenge for RSPO certification
According to the CEO of RSPO, Joe D'Cruz:
We recognise that for our global standards to be effective, they must be practical and implementable, in touch with the realities on the ground as well as regulatory frameworks that vary across palm oil producing regions.
The smart money is with the RSPO if it can get the support of its majors in Wilmar, Golden Agri Resources etc to endorse the new standards with high carbon stocks and offsets in the play.
The notion of carbon offsets may be worthless when first parties claim it but the Remediation process at the RSPO will yield much for biodiversity and conservation in Indonesia if the RSPO enforces this along with the new standards.
Offsets will not be an easy issue for the RSPO as communities affected by RSPO member plantations have very different demands ranging from saving forests for their sustenance to demands for proper infrastructure and development. Finding solutions for these radically different demands is what sustainability is about.
This is a complex issue where the RSPO has to find a starting point. In light of the weight of RSPO certification for markets in the EU, the bottomline for the RSPO must be that it meets the EUDR requirements in compliance with national laws.
One of those laws governing high conservation value and/or high carbon stock areas is that a maximum of 20% can be set aside in the name of sustainability. Unfortunately for some licensed areas that contained more than 20% of high carbon stock areas as defined by HCSA, RSPO members who held the license have walked away from the license only to see identified HCS areas clear cut as local communities wanted their areas developed.
What this means in simple terms for Greenpeace and Rainforest Action Network is that the RSPO lost control of high carbon stock areas when its members walked away from these licenses in order to keep their supply chains fit for extrajudicial demands like the EU's Deforestation Regulations.
We reached out to the RSPO to confirm whether our understanding of the revised RSPO standards was correct because there is no way big groups like Greenpeace or Rainforest Action Network could get it so wrong. Right?
In his email response, Hun Yun Seng from the RSPO Secretariat wrote:
"High Carbon Stock is present and accounted for in the revised RSPO P&C standard. The criterion and indicators have been revised for clarity, auditability and implementability, as well as relevant to different geographics. There has been no weakening of the 2018 standards in any way. In fact, we believe that the revision in terms of structure while respecting the content makes it more practical for implementation. We are using the HCV-HCSA Integrated Assessment Manual (2017 or 2023 versions) as our implementation mechanism, and RSPO will be signing an MoU with HCVN to strengthen implementation of the criterion (today, in fact). Taking account of the other procedures and systems within RSPO which complement the standard (e.g., the Remediation and Compensation Procedure), RSPO believe that our collective standards, systems and procedures now have a stronger ability to deliver positive and long-lasting impacts on People, Planet and Prosperity."
If creating landscapes, ecosystems and habitats, ecosystem services, community needs or cultural identity is the endgame, Grant Rosoman and Gemma Tillack need to smell the coffee because producing palm oil sustainably is not as simplistic as saving a patch of high carbon stock forests.
Published November 2024 CSPO Watch
As reported by Mongabay:
However, some NGOs say the new standard could open loopholes for deforestation, notably through the RSPO’s introduction of a new definition for high-carbon stock (HCS) forest that diverges from the globally recognized HCS Approach (HCSA) toolkit.
Critics ( namely Greenpeace and Rainforest Action Network to help Hans De Jong’s vague writing ) warn that this approach may pave the way for more palm oil expansion into forests, as the RSPO definition prioritizes the carbon value of forests over their broader ecological role, potentially allowing companies to convert certain forest areas that would have been protected under the HCSA toolkit.
Under the existing standard, palm oil companies that are members of the RSPO are required to conserve biodiverse, carbon-rich forests that support local communities, using the high conservation value (HCV) and HCS Approach toolkits to identify these forest areas. In 2018, the HCV and HCSA organizations developed an integrated assessment framework that RSPO members use to guide conservation practices.
To ensure that its rules are more applicable on the ground, the RSPO’s new standard now reflects the existence of this integrated toolkit, which members should use to assess HCV and HCS areas, RSPO chief executive officer Joe D’Cruz told Mongabay.”
Can the RSPO’s new standards define sustainable palm oil better?
The RSPO's proposed new standard is not a divergence of its commitments to sustainable palm oil but a convergence of High Conservation Values with High Carbon Stock Approach.
Both Greenpeace and Rainforest Action Network despite being very vocal on the topic of RSPO certified palm oil, seem to be blissfully ignorant of what happens outside of their office walls.
The High Carbon Stock Approach (HCSA) which these two groups want the RSPO to retain in its present form has failed to deliver its grand ambitions.
The HCSA is a decent assessment tool for conservation as it demands the protection of high carbon stock areas. It became a useless tool when it attempted to look like a tool for sustainability by claiming to “impact landscapes, ecosystems and habitats, ecosystem services, community needs or cultural identity.”
Greenpeace and Rainforest Action Network staffers can hug the HCSA as they fall to sleep but the facts and figures on HCSA should bring them nightmares. Indonesia as the world’s biggest producer of palm oil and favored target of Greenpeace and Rainforest Action Network fundraising campaigns is a perfect example.
According to Statista:
The total land area of oil palm plantations in Indonesia from 2013 to 2022 is about 15.34 million hectares
Of this, the RSPO has certified sustainable palm oil production areas in Indonesia of less than 25%.
What does this mean in terms of sticking to a failed no deforestation no peat palm oil piece of paper on Indonesia?
Let me spell this out in plain words for Grant Rosoman and Gemma Tillack. The RSPO’s impact on Indonesia’s palm oil production has stagnated at less than 25 percent of total areas under palm oil plantations in Indonesia. This stagnation of RSPO impact on the ground has gone on for years. Rosoman and Tillack should be well aware of it unless they had their head stuck in some other money making “save the forests” fight in other countries.
The saddest fact about the RSPO is that its members represent 42% of global palm oil production but the RSPO could only certify 20% of that.
The news gets worse for Rosoman and Tillack with their poor understanding of what the RSPO wants to do with the HCSA
Four majors in the palm oil industry, Wilmar International, Golden Agri Resources, Sime Darby( newly renamed SD Guthrie) and IOI Corporation Berhad have already quit the HCSA committee.
Did this doom Indonesian forests because RSPO majors walked away from HCSA?
Clearly no.
Indonesia is a global leader in reducing deforestation – now with the lowest reported levels in 20 years. To recognize Indonesia’s impressive results, Norway announced a contribution of 100 million US dollars to support the country’s continuous efforts.
The U.S. and Indonesia Signed Landmark Agreement in Support of Indonesia’s Forestry and Land Use Goals.
The breadth and depth of these G2G programs is what the RSPO needs to strive towards. Having a lonely plantation here and there that subscribed to the HCSA is completely meaningless in terms of a sustainable landscape.
But getting back to the HCSA version held so dear by Greenpeace and Rainforest Action Network. Rosoman and Gillack are obviously unaware of the socio-economic dynamics in Indonesia. These guys with their loose lips and idle hands should do some research into protected areas and their impact on landscapes, ecosystems and habitats, ecosystem services, community needs or cultural identity.
From Gunung Palung National Park in West Kalimantan to Rainforest Action Network’s pet project in Gunung Leuser National Park, both of which are sold in fundraising campaigns as orangutan habitats and high carbon areas, even legal protection under Indonesian law has failed to protect these areas from illegal deforestation.
What makes Greenpeace or Rainforest Action Network think the half-dead HCSA would have made a difference? Identifying high conservation value or high carbon stock areas are a no-brainer for conservation groups which have no skin in the game except for their own raison d'etre in getting a paycheque.
Will Grant Rosoman’s paycheque from Greenpeace save more forests or the RSPO’s proposal to embed HCSA into its main framework for sustainable palm oil?
The Big Challenge for RSPO certification
According to the CEO of RSPO, Joe D'Cruz:
We recognise that for our global standards to be effective, they must be practical and implementable, in touch with the realities on the ground as well as regulatory frameworks that vary across palm oil producing regions.
The smart money is with the RSPO if it can get the support of its majors in Wilmar, Golden Agri Resources etc to endorse the new standards with high carbon stocks and offsets in the play.
The notion of carbon offsets may be worthless when first parties claim it but the Remediation process at the RSPO will yield much for biodiversity and conservation in Indonesia if the RSPO enforces this along with the new standards.
Offsets will not be an easy issue for the RSPO as communities affected by RSPO member plantations have very different demands ranging from saving forests for their sustenance to demands for proper infrastructure and development. Finding solutions for these radically different demands is what sustainability is about.
This is a complex issue where the RSPO has to find a starting point. In light of the weight of RSPO certification for markets in the EU, the bottomline for the RSPO must be that it meets the EUDR requirements in compliance with national laws.
One of those laws governing high conservation value and/or high carbon stock areas is that a maximum of 20% can be set aside in the name of sustainability. Unfortunately for some licensed areas that contained more than 20% of high carbon stock areas as defined by HCSA, RSPO members who held the license have walked away from the license only to see identified HCS areas clear cut as local communities wanted their areas developed.
What this means in simple terms for Greenpeace and Rainforest Action Network is that the RSPO lost control of high carbon stock areas when its members walked away from these licenses in order to keep their supply chains fit for extrajudicial demands like the EU's Deforestation Regulations.
We reached out to the RSPO to confirm whether our understanding of the revised RSPO standards was correct because there is no way big groups like Greenpeace or Rainforest Action Network could get it so wrong. Right?
In his email response, Hun Yun Seng from the RSPO Secretariat wrote:
"High Carbon Stock is present and accounted for in the revised RSPO P&C standard. The criterion and indicators have been revised for clarity, auditability and implementability, as well as relevant to different geographics. There has been no weakening of the 2018 standards in any way. In fact, we believe that the revision in terms of structure while respecting the content makes it more practical for implementation. We are using the HCV-HCSA Integrated Assessment Manual (2017 or 2023 versions) as our implementation mechanism, and RSPO will be signing an MoU with HCVN to strengthen implementation of the criterion (today, in fact). Taking account of the other procedures and systems within RSPO which complement the standard (e.g., the Remediation and Compensation Procedure), RSPO believe that our collective standards, systems and procedures now have a stronger ability to deliver positive and long-lasting impacts on People, Planet and Prosperity."
If creating landscapes, ecosystems and habitats, ecosystem services, community needs or cultural identity is the endgame, Grant Rosoman and Gemma Tillack need to smell the coffee because producing palm oil sustainably is not as simplistic as saving a patch of high carbon stock forests.
Published November 2024 CSPO Watch