3. My mission To explain my world To give you an understanding of the retail drivers for environmental assurance To explain what this could mean for primary producers To promote collaboration
4. What is good business? Financial control Adaptability Sustainability Customer satisfaction Happy employees Money in the bank Customer service Sound supplier relationships Resource management Legal compliance Strong relationships
5. What is good business? Effectively managing Money and resources Money Customers Suppliers Internal controls Resources Production capacity People, relationships Natural resources
6. Customers Some have specific requirements, not just product specifications…..
11. International scenario Carbon labelling Carbon Trust – PAS 2050 ISO 14067 GHG Protocol WRI/WBCSD Aeon – “Global Warming Prevention Declaration Casino – preparing for mandatory environmental labelling in France EC – role of carbon footprinting in European climate policy Greenpeace – piloting labelling in Austria with organic as the best case standard
12. Consumers NRM / NGO’s Retailer Retailer Agrifood business Primary producer Soil Water Air
13. Is this good business? Running multiple systems not good for $ or effective use of human resources Potential for financial pressure to transfer to other resources Loss of resilience – personal and natural resources
14. What would be good business? One system meeting needs of all stakeholders Checking regularly that system works On ground benefits Efficient Financial benefits Modifying system / practices as needed
15. Water Air Soil Retailer Agrifood business Retailer NRM Primary producer
16. Environmental Systems Recognition Framework to develop a credible means of recognising on farm environmental certification systems that meet the requirements of major domestic customers and other stakeholders to avoid the need for Australian primary producers to implement and manage multiple environmental management systems
18. Benefits provides clarity on systems that meet stakeholder environmental requirements allows producers to implement a single system to meet the requirements of multiple stakeholders maximises the options for producers and maximises the supply base for retailers / agrifood businesses provides structure for monitoring and data collection regarding environmental impacts / remediation minimises the time spent on compliance and increases resources available to environmentally responsible farming practices “recognition” process is independent and credible
19. Scope All the horticultural farming activities that happen on the farm up to and including harvest
20. Areas addressed Chemical management Fertiliser and soil additive management Land and soil management Water management Biodiversity
21. Areas addressed Waste and pollution management Energy Climate change Internal system management System integrity control Auditors
22. Structure of the framework Banner statements Compliance criteria
23. 1. Chemical management 1.1 Agricultural chemicals Agricultural chemicals are handled, stored, used and disposed of in a responsible manner, minimising the risk of environmental contamination
24. 1.1 Agricultural chemicalsCompliance criteria 1.1.1 The use of chemical control methods are justified, through crop monitoring or a recognised preventative program. Records of application and justification are required. 1.1.2Non-chemical control methods are implemented where possible. Records of actions are required.
25. Recognition process Developing a credible process Reviewed existing benchmarking systems Talked to key stakeholders Secured a reputable and experience “benchmarker” Two stages – desk audit and verification (on site and / or with certification bodies)
26. Progress Retailers appear interested Want industry support for the initiative before progressing further
27. Support for the initiative can be shown by endorsing: the concept of “recognising” environmental systems that meet retailer / agribusiness / NRM organisation requirements. the eleven areas covered in the version 6.4 of the framework as critical to proving sound environmental management. the banner statements included in version 6.4 of the framework. the compliance criteria included in version 6.4 of the framework.
28. Awareness Is this a tool that could be useful in your world? Is this something you can support / endorse? Two worlds collide
29. Interested? Current project finishes 31 May 2010 Copies of framework in packs If you think there is merit in this project please contact me jane.lovell@tqainc.com.au 0419 554 047
Notes de l'éditeur
What is the impact of this on natural resources? How much resilience is there in this picture?
What can we learn from QA?Running multiple systems isn’t good business.You can expect some resistance when you ask people to start documenting and proving things they have been doing for years without the need to prove anything to anyone.Being asked to do this without a clear reward or payback can lead to negativity, hostility, resentment. Casualties of increased pressure can be production capacity, the natural resources, people’s goodwill and self esteem. So – how do we not do this again and how do we encourage or at least reduce resistance to the uptake of environmental assurance / management systems?
