Mandatory Certifications Needed to Build Back Better
The EU is hitting the pause button on its ambitions for sustainable agriculture in the EU as the Ukraine war disrupts EU agricultural supplies.
According to a report on Phys.org. Scientists are urging Europe not to delay the transition to greener agriculture in response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine, which threatens global wheat supplies and raises fears over food shortages.
"This is very bad news," said An Lambrechts, of Greenpeace International, from Geneva, where international negotiations are taking place for better protection of biodiversity.
That view is shared by scientists.
An appeal signed by more than 500 experts has called on the European Union to "reinforce—and not abandon—the transformation towards a healthy, just, and environmentally-friendly food system".
"We have to look at sensible short-term measures but we must not neglect those long-term targets," said Hermann Lotze-Campen, agricultural economist at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), which led the appeal.
EU Hostilities Towards Palm Oil Indicator
Greenpeace International and the 500 experts that is urging the EU not to abandon its green targets for European agriculture need not worry, if the Union’s approach towards palm oil is any indication.
Backroom chats in the Malaysian palm oil industry have swirled around the EU’s continued push to ensure the sustainability of palm oil product imports into the EU.
It is not known at this time whether this back door diplomacy extends to the EU’s import of soy, beef, coffee and cocoa which are all products that were targeted by EU ambitions to green up global agriculture.
As far as palm oil is concerned, EU demands can be expected to roar back post conflict with Due Diligence as the platform for palm oil sustainability.
What is Due Diligence? Can it be relied upon to meet the EU’s expectations of Reduced Deforestation?
Here’s what the EU hopes to achieve with Corporate Due Diligence. In a briefing titled “Towards a mandatory EU system of due diligence for supply chains”
The growth of international supply chains has undoubtedly brought enormous benefits to
developing countries, but at the same time it has had certain negative impacts, relating for instance
to violations of human and labour rights, including forced labour and child labour, environmental
damage, land grabbing, and corruption. Multinational companies have gained unprecedented
power, creating asymmetries in relation to weak regulation and enforcement in developing
countries.
For several decades, multinational companies have been encouraged to take responsibility for their
supply chains on a voluntary basis. Whereas in some sectors, where violations have been most
egregious, particularly in the extractive industries or in timber extraction, mandatory frameworks
have already been adopted at EU level, for others it was hoped that the voluntary approach, guided
by several international frameworks, would suffice.
The evidence available, however, from academic research, civil society organisations,
implementation of the EU Non-financial Reporting Directive, and studies commissioned by the EU
institutions, has made it clear that the voluntary approach is not enough. Against this background,
many voices consider that the EU should adopt mandatory due diligence legislation. Human rights
and the environment stand out as two areas where such legislation would be both most needed
and most effective.
The same backroom chats from the Malaysian palm oil industry are saying that the EU’s current preference is for Jurisdictional Certification. Conservation, the NGO, did a comprehensive report on Jurisdictional Certification/ Jurisdictional Approach in which the group concluded that:
"The current balance of risk vs. reward for governments in a wider range of commodity producing jurisdictions does not tip in favor of “halting deforestation.
The JA represents an important and promising systemic approach to address the complex challenges behind agriculture-driven deforestation and social conflict. It is not a quick fix."
The obvious question for the EU is its acceptance of Jurisdictional Certification as an effective means of imposing EU standards on its imports.
In light of the EU’s expectations, it would seem that Due Diligence is a short-term stop-gap measure to control importing deforestation. This slow fix according to Conservation smells like the Mass Balance supply chain where the bulk of imported products is certified as sustainable by merely including a few percentage worth of actual certified product. This cannot be acceptable when the ambitions of the EU are professed to be so high.
This creates a quandary for multinational corporations like Unilever. Left floundering in the dark as to how to meet Due Diligence requirements, Unilever is falling back on third party support to try and show that its supplies are clean. The company’s latest attempt is the use of blockchain technology with SAP, whose poor choice of name, Greentoken, suggests that it is a token effort similar to Greenpalm which is no longer in business due to overwhelming criticism of its products.
Mandatory EU System for Due Diligence Requires Mandatory Certification
The EU cannot leave its expectations of corporate due diligence to grab at whatever certification scheme comes along. This is especially so in the case of palm oil where complementing mandatory certification schemes are available from Indonesia and Malaysia to cover some 85% of global palm oil production.
The national schemes under the Indonesian Sustainable Palm Oil (ISPO) and Malaysian Sustainable Palm Oil (MSPO) provide stronger assurance of quality as they are part of national policies on sustainable development.
The Malaysian Sustainable Palm Oil scheme for example, is only one of many certification programs in the country that oversee the production of goods and commodities including rubber and timber. As part of a national program, its land use is governed by strict licensing by the Malaysian Palm Oil Board. What this means is that should a rubber or timber plantation or a new planting area wants a license to grow and sell palm oil, it will have to apply for certification under the MSPO before it gets access to the open market.
In Indonesia, the Forest and Land Use (FOLU) policy, which was enacted after the moratorium on palm oil licenses expired, has more potential to impact sustainable land use as the country shrugs off cheap foreign influence on its sustainable development.
The EU must note well, that the ISPO, despite the criticism of its standards by foreign NGOs, offers an accountability that is supported by Indonesia through its FOLU policy. No other certification scheme will have the same strength of effect on land use by the Indonesian palm oil industry.
The transparency which the Indonesian government has shown in reporting the presence of illegal palm oil plantations needs to be acknowledged by the EU which has demanded transparency in supply chains. The question of legality is problematic as explained by the Indonesian Palm Oil Association (GAPKI). The quickest solution to meet the EU’s demands under Due Diligence is to use the ISPO as a credible certification scheme while the issue of legality is being sorted out.
To further boost its credibility, the ISPO Committee Secretariat, Herdradjad Natawidjaja, announced that oil palm plantation companies must have an Indonesian Sustainable Palm Oil (ISPO) certificate. Companies that fail to secure ISPO certification now face administrative sanctions which would remove their ability to export.
There is no doubt that despite the EU’s vociferous policy statements against palm oil, and the the equally vociferous responses from palm oil producing countries, there is a shared ambition by the combating sides to produce palm oil sustainably.
The problems that both sides in the palm oil debate face are complex. At a time when palm oil producing countries have shown that the industry can thrive without the EU market, its important for EU policy makers to acknowledge that palm oil producing countries have shown by example, that EU ambitions to reduce imported deforestation are better served by mandated certification.
April, 2022. CSPO Watch
According to a report on Phys.org. Scientists are urging Europe not to delay the transition to greener agriculture in response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine, which threatens global wheat supplies and raises fears over food shortages.
"This is very bad news," said An Lambrechts, of Greenpeace International, from Geneva, where international negotiations are taking place for better protection of biodiversity.
That view is shared by scientists.
An appeal signed by more than 500 experts has called on the European Union to "reinforce—and not abandon—the transformation towards a healthy, just, and environmentally-friendly food system".
"We have to look at sensible short-term measures but we must not neglect those long-term targets," said Hermann Lotze-Campen, agricultural economist at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), which led the appeal.
EU Hostilities Towards Palm Oil Indicator
Greenpeace International and the 500 experts that is urging the EU not to abandon its green targets for European agriculture need not worry, if the Union’s approach towards palm oil is any indication.
Backroom chats in the Malaysian palm oil industry have swirled around the EU’s continued push to ensure the sustainability of palm oil product imports into the EU.
It is not known at this time whether this back door diplomacy extends to the EU’s import of soy, beef, coffee and cocoa which are all products that were targeted by EU ambitions to green up global agriculture.
As far as palm oil is concerned, EU demands can be expected to roar back post conflict with Due Diligence as the platform for palm oil sustainability.
What is Due Diligence? Can it be relied upon to meet the EU’s expectations of Reduced Deforestation?
Here’s what the EU hopes to achieve with Corporate Due Diligence. In a briefing titled “Towards a mandatory EU system of due diligence for supply chains”
The growth of international supply chains has undoubtedly brought enormous benefits to
developing countries, but at the same time it has had certain negative impacts, relating for instance
to violations of human and labour rights, including forced labour and child labour, environmental
damage, land grabbing, and corruption. Multinational companies have gained unprecedented
power, creating asymmetries in relation to weak regulation and enforcement in developing
countries.
For several decades, multinational companies have been encouraged to take responsibility for their
supply chains on a voluntary basis. Whereas in some sectors, where violations have been most
egregious, particularly in the extractive industries or in timber extraction, mandatory frameworks
have already been adopted at EU level, for others it was hoped that the voluntary approach, guided
by several international frameworks, would suffice.
The evidence available, however, from academic research, civil society organisations,
implementation of the EU Non-financial Reporting Directive, and studies commissioned by the EU
institutions, has made it clear that the voluntary approach is not enough. Against this background,
many voices consider that the EU should adopt mandatory due diligence legislation. Human rights
and the environment stand out as two areas where such legislation would be both most needed
and most effective.
The same backroom chats from the Malaysian palm oil industry are saying that the EU’s current preference is for Jurisdictional Certification. Conservation, the NGO, did a comprehensive report on Jurisdictional Certification/ Jurisdictional Approach in which the group concluded that:
"The current balance of risk vs. reward for governments in a wider range of commodity producing jurisdictions does not tip in favor of “halting deforestation.
The JA represents an important and promising systemic approach to address the complex challenges behind agriculture-driven deforestation and social conflict. It is not a quick fix."
The obvious question for the EU is its acceptance of Jurisdictional Certification as an effective means of imposing EU standards on its imports.
In light of the EU’s expectations, it would seem that Due Diligence is a short-term stop-gap measure to control importing deforestation. This slow fix according to Conservation smells like the Mass Balance supply chain where the bulk of imported products is certified as sustainable by merely including a few percentage worth of actual certified product. This cannot be acceptable when the ambitions of the EU are professed to be so high.
This creates a quandary for multinational corporations like Unilever. Left floundering in the dark as to how to meet Due Diligence requirements, Unilever is falling back on third party support to try and show that its supplies are clean. The company’s latest attempt is the use of blockchain technology with SAP, whose poor choice of name, Greentoken, suggests that it is a token effort similar to Greenpalm which is no longer in business due to overwhelming criticism of its products.
Mandatory EU System for Due Diligence Requires Mandatory Certification
The EU cannot leave its expectations of corporate due diligence to grab at whatever certification scheme comes along. This is especially so in the case of palm oil where complementing mandatory certification schemes are available from Indonesia and Malaysia to cover some 85% of global palm oil production.
The national schemes under the Indonesian Sustainable Palm Oil (ISPO) and Malaysian Sustainable Palm Oil (MSPO) provide stronger assurance of quality as they are part of national policies on sustainable development.
The Malaysian Sustainable Palm Oil scheme for example, is only one of many certification programs in the country that oversee the production of goods and commodities including rubber and timber. As part of a national program, its land use is governed by strict licensing by the Malaysian Palm Oil Board. What this means is that should a rubber or timber plantation or a new planting area wants a license to grow and sell palm oil, it will have to apply for certification under the MSPO before it gets access to the open market.
In Indonesia, the Forest and Land Use (FOLU) policy, which was enacted after the moratorium on palm oil licenses expired, has more potential to impact sustainable land use as the country shrugs off cheap foreign influence on its sustainable development.
The EU must note well, that the ISPO, despite the criticism of its standards by foreign NGOs, offers an accountability that is supported by Indonesia through its FOLU policy. No other certification scheme will have the same strength of effect on land use by the Indonesian palm oil industry.
The transparency which the Indonesian government has shown in reporting the presence of illegal palm oil plantations needs to be acknowledged by the EU which has demanded transparency in supply chains. The question of legality is problematic as explained by the Indonesian Palm Oil Association (GAPKI). The quickest solution to meet the EU’s demands under Due Diligence is to use the ISPO as a credible certification scheme while the issue of legality is being sorted out.
To further boost its credibility, the ISPO Committee Secretariat, Herdradjad Natawidjaja, announced that oil palm plantation companies must have an Indonesian Sustainable Palm Oil (ISPO) certificate. Companies that fail to secure ISPO certification now face administrative sanctions which would remove their ability to export.
There is no doubt that despite the EU’s vociferous policy statements against palm oil, and the the equally vociferous responses from palm oil producing countries, there is a shared ambition by the combating sides to produce palm oil sustainably.
The problems that both sides in the palm oil debate face are complex. At a time when palm oil producing countries have shown that the industry can thrive without the EU market, its important for EU policy makers to acknowledge that palm oil producing countries have shown by example, that EU ambitions to reduce imported deforestation are better served by mandated certification.
April, 2022. CSPO Watch