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

ProF

ores

t

dawn@proforest.net

anders@saperda.se