Sustainable palm oil - RSPO vs Greenpeace, Greenpeace targets, French nutrition policy, Club of Rome


On the recent RSPO meeting in Europe, interesting excerpts include the following, and we put contextual comments in blue:

the (palm oil) sector needs "violent endangerment" to keep the debate going

Marks & Spencer's sustainable development manager Fiona Wheatley: "food businesses and consumers didn't understand the impact emerging economics could fact if pressures to source 100% sustainable palm oil built too quickly... (RSPO) has created a lifeline between partners who have had not contact before... some companies and brands (are looking) for alternative partnerships[1]...  we need to make sure we have a stronger standard... we sometimes need those different opinions and a bit of violent endangerment to keep things moving... and aspirations high..." - this seems to refer to the RSPO vs TFT-Greenpeace competition over market share in sustainability programs. This has even resulted in RSPO issuing an open letter to ask TFT to collaborate with them. It is interesting that a duopoly in non-Europe biofuel certification is not thought well of and the monopolistic approach is preferred (different from what is seen in soy sustainability). Here RSPO's call for TFT collaboration: http://www.rspo.org/file/tft/TFT_RSPO_open_letter_FINAL.pdf  and Mongabay talks about it here: http://news.mongabay.com/2014/0527-rspo-tft.html.

Cynthia Ong of Land Empowerment Animals and People: "pressures from western (NGOs) such as Greenpeace, were frustrating producers in Malaysia and Indonesia... communities say they want to plant oil palm because it will put food on their tables and the best option we can present them is RSPO certification - ditto

Pat Vendetti, Greenpeace senior forest campaigner: "our focus is on ending deforestation and not tearing down the palm oil industry and the RSPO... another myth is there's a neo-colonial plot.. it's too convenient an excuse for the Malaysian government to trot out...we need to change the mind-set of the Malaysian government..." - sustainability is widely viewed from industry as a non-tariff barrier and it has raised such concerns that the WTO is trying to define "private standards" and that the UN is also looking it; as they note that these typically end up disadvantaging small and marginal producers.

Puvan Selvanathan, UN global compact head of sustainable agriculture (former Sime Darby): "all of the energy we put into debate.. could be better spent looking for a solution.. the message of doing a good thing is being lost in the heat and the emotion. It's a tough sell to have one group of people to tell you how to live your life..."  - in palm oil sustainability, the approach has been driven more by corporate to NGO negotiations (this differs from soy, where there is more government and industry association mediation, on the buy as well as the sell side). Although it is labelled as multi-stakeholder, there are some gaps: a) government is not involved, resulting in problematic differences in the private standard versus regulations and laws; and b) practitioners tell us that actual workings of working groups is that a handful of companies may represent the industry but with few updates to all fellow members, resulting in surprise new major policy administrative changes. Specialists reckon that NGOs set more dedicated resources to these negotiations than does the palm oil industry. Also, some point to the tendency that controversial topics (that growers disfavor) are escalated until they end up offered for General Assembly voting (where voting numbers and blocs are against growers); giving a sense of powerlessness to the minority growers who bear the cost of compliance. Notwithstanding these concerns, lead palm oil industry companies, especially those based in Malaysia and Singapore are leading the push for sustainable certification via RSPO or the new TFT non-certification program.

Robert Hoster, Cargill Refined Oils Europe trading director: "the whole chain needed to be involved in sustainable palm oil from the start.. we need to make sure we make sustainability more affordable.. we need to ensure its cost effective to grow..."  - this might refer to the approach taken by private standards to engage with corporations in order to effect faster change and the problem of the low level engagements with government. This is starting to worry politicians as sustainability is reaching the stage that large private standards and their commercial partners are pointing toward supply-chain shifts that may marginalize and/or bring complicated and costly certification to smallholders and farmers with small estates; note Australia beef worries here, /khorreports-palmoil/2014/05/politicians-worry-about-wwf-roundtables.html. Clearly they are an important voting base. We also heard earlier in the year that proposals by a smallholder certifying "technical NGO" to introduce loans to Indonesian palm smallholders (so that they can pay for the certification process and more?) has raised concerns among policy makers there. Cost of certification is a prime concern for small producers where it weighs heavier. For example, the RSPO costing for group smallholder includes some fees of US$10,000 periodically. It would be useful for the cost-benefit for smallholders to be reviewed independently.

 News link: http://www.foodnavigator.com/Market-Trends/Palm-oil-debate-in-quotes


Greenpeace indicates its latest strategy and targets here, http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/deforestation-palm-oil-more-greenwash-greenpeace - Annisa Rahmawati is a forest campaigner at Greenpeace Southeast Asia: "Business as usual cannot continue - Greenpeace is deeply concerned that well-known players in the RSPO are pretending membership alone confers a glow of sustainability. It is waiting to see what public action the RSPO will take on the cases raised with it and how it will strengthen its standards.... In the meantime, Greenpeace demands prominent RSPO members including IOI, KLK, Musim Mas, RGE group and Sime Darby to stop the bulldozers and urgently implement a no deforestation policy. It will continue to push more palm oil consumers such as Kao (the Japanese personal care company behind brands such as John Frieda and Bioré) and others to clean up their supply chains.... To reach this tipping point has not been easy. Some elements want to portray the shift to responsible palm as an attack on the palm oil industry itself, as a call to boycott palm oil or a form or "green protectionism". To them, Greenpeace says this: don't ignore the crisis – don't ignore the fact that Sumatra is burning and Papua's pristine forests are disappearing. Recognise there is a problem, and choose to be part of the solution. Palm oil can be grown responsibly, and must make a genuine contribution to Indonesia's development."


At the same time, new proposals on French nutrition policy worries palm oil interests: "two French politicians, Senator Yves Daudigny and Senator Catherine Deroche, which is set to pose a major threat to Malaysia’s top commodity export in Europe, according to palm oil industry market observers.... Both Daudigny and Deroche had presented a report to the French Senate calling for an introduction of “behavioural” taxes on food and beverages deemed dangerous to the public health in France.... Nutella is a chocolate and hazelnut spread made by Italian company Ferrero that is extremely popular in France, which accounts for 26% (about 100 million jars) of the product’s world consumption.... However, thanks to the quick action and successful engagements by the Malaysian government and palm oil industry players, the Nutella tax proposal was gunned down in December 2012.... So this year, Daudigny is trying a new attempt to champion his cause by roping in Deroche to propose that all taxes of vegetable oils in France be “harmonised”.... http://www.thestar.com.my/Business/Business-News/2014/06/07/Another-antipalm-oil-drive-French-politicians-calling-for-new-taxes-on-food-and-beverages-deemed-dan/


On the big picture, it's interesting to see this:  Scientists vindicate 'Limits to Growth' – urge investment in 'circular economy'; http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2014/jun/04/scientists-limits-to-growth-vindicated-investment-transition-circular-economy

Palm sustainability toughens up?

The recent suspension of an RSPO grower member over non submission of NPP is unusual in that there are many others in the same position. Will they all come to be reprimanded and suspended too, in order to regularise the NPP situation or is this a showcase to remind all about proper implementation? The company reports no material impact from this suspension.
 
TFT vs RSPO? RSPO calls for greater collaboration on zero deforestation commitments (05/27/2014) The Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) today called for greater collaboration between it and the leading implementer of zero deforestation policies, The Forest Trust (TFT). " TFT very publicly resigned from the RSPO in 2012 over what it perceived as weak criteria for limiting deforestation and peatlands conversion for oil palm plantations. TFT has since brokered a number of "zero deforestation" commitments from major palm oil producers, traders, and buyers, including Neste Oil, Ferrero, Reckitt Benckiser, Wilmar, New Britain Palm Oil, Cerelia, Vandemoortele, Mars, Florin, and Delhaize Group, among others. Those agreements were modeled after policies TFT established with Nestle and Golden-Agri Resources. TFT is also implementing Asia Pulp & Paper's forest conservation policy....," http://news.mongabay.com/2014/0527-rspo-tft.html#o0AGhAfxPfBssMZd.99.
 
Other topics to look out for:
- financiers set the bar higher, example HSBC; Deutsche Bank sells Bumitama stake reports Friends of the Earth amidst allegations http://www.foei.org/news/deutsche-bank-divests-from-bumitama/.
- Timber: "WWF accuses APRIL of breaking sustainability commitment by logging rainforest in Borneo.  (05/23/2014) Environmental group WWF has accused Singapore-based pulp and paper giant Asia Pacific Resources International Limited (APRIL) of breaking its recent conservation commitment by destroying rainforest in Indonesian Borneo. APRIL has denied the charges...."http://news.mongabay.com/2014/0523-april-north-kalimantan.html?n3ws1ttr  
 
 
Khor Reports comments:
 
The escalation and new support from the top plantation companies of new programs is starting to play out. It may get a bit rougher for all as the transition to wider and deeper NGO-led standards pushes on. We hear that NGOs may feel quite encouraged to move harder. Also, their remote sensing systems getting in place to pin point company behaviour. There are more  company reports on the big companies to verify implementation and what they have done in recent years. Thus, the question is whether the new programs will garner them the 2 year or so breathing space that GAR/ Sinar Mas achieved with NGOs, post boycott. Inter and intra NGO competition is rife and also noted in other sectors including soy.
 
Another important development is the apparent growing rift (between TFT and RSPO as they duke it out for market share. TFT is apparently offering a non-certification and focused sustainability program. Crucially, there is expected to be overall fewer but higher obligations on hot button issues (source: industry expert interviewed May 2014).
Note: TFT is associated with Greenpeace on palm sustainability issues. RSPO offers a popular certification program for traditional non-fuel usages while ISCC is popular for certification for biofuel usages. 
 
 
 
 

Politicians worry about WWF roundtables?

More worries over trade control tilting against primary producers from Down Under...

IN SENATOR Ron Boswell's last big Senate speech before his retirement next month, he takes a massive - if predictable - swipe at the World Wildlife Fund (WWF)....  "WWF: 'privatisating' production - SENATOR RON BOSWELL," 15 May, 2014 07:45 PM; http://www.queenslandcountrylife.com.au/news/agriculture/general/opinion/wwf-privatisating-production/2698613.aspx; "There is a co-ordinated campaign by WWF and others to coerce industries into certification schemes... Time for producers to take control... Apart from my farewell next month, this is the last substantial speech I shall make in the Senate. I have thought long and hard about what I should say. What I want to do is leave all Australian primary producers with a warning: take action now to maintain producer control over the production and marketing of your product. I have been in the Senate for 31 years. All that time, I have defended and promoted primary producers. They are wonderful people, feeding and clothing our nation and many more people overseas, generating vital wealth for the benefit of all Australians. However, they are under threat. That threat comes in the form of a long-term strategy by a powerful and sophisticated combination of environmental zealots and major corporations that would effectively control primary production practices worldwide......"


Other Australia worries about its primary producers versus NGOs here: /khorreports-palmoil/2014/04/australia-resource-industries-seek-ban.html

CIMB survey, WWF soy report


CIMB recently issued a report on its survey of 3,000 or so of its staff on their cooking oil preferences. The main finding was on health nutrition perception. Do check it out: "Plantations (N) - Opting for healthier cooking oils" noting that "We were slightly surprised that only 43% of respondents in our recent survey picked palm oil as their preferred cooking oil. This could be due to the rising affluence of Malaysian consumers as well as a lack of awareness of the health benefits of palm oil as cooking oil producers may have shifted their marketing activities to other edible oils over the years given that palm-olein-based cooking oil is regulated. The survey reveals that more work may be needed to educate consumers of the health benefits of palm oil. Maintain Neutral on the sector with First Resources as our top pick."

I've downloaded and will be reading with interest WWF's "Soy Report Card - Assessing the use of responsible soy for animal feed in Europe," The broad finding on 88 European retailers, food service companies, CGMs and dairy, meat, egg and feed companies sourcing of soy for animal feed or animal products: "The picture is disappointing. Some frontrunner companies have made strong
commitments to stop sourcing irresponsible soy from recently cleared forests, savannahs and grasslands. They have also started buying “better soy” from producers who adhere to robust responsible production guidelines.... The majority, however, are lagging behind in commitments – and even more in concrete actions such as buying responsible soy. This leaves producers with little incentive to certify their soy as responsible and risks the integrity of some of the world’s most valuable ecosystems, like the Amazon, Cerrado and Chaco."

 
source: WWF Soy Report Card 2014

WWF says: "It’s not only about forests — grasslands and savannahs can also be negatively impacted by irresponsible soy production." It talks about "responsible substitution" or the substitution of imported soy to "build high quality European protein supplies customized for the requirements of the European market and, in some cases, to address the demand from some European consumers for GM-free soybeans and soy protein feed. Examples of such initiatives include Danube Soya...."