Post on 10-Apr-2017
transcript
Public policy and private-driven standards and commitments: synergies and antagonisms from
formulation to implementation
Pablo PachecoPalo Alto, CAApril, 2016
HIGHLIGHTS
Broader sustainability goals are increasingly shared among stakeholders
BUT, different understandings of what sustainable supply means in practice
There are still some tensions about what (public/private) rules to follow
Sustainability processes increasingly circumscribed to stopping deforestation
YET, solutions to halt deforestation are not enough to support sustainability
For zero deforestation to work, there is need of sustainable intensification
This may only be possible under more complex public-private arrangements
AND, by linking supply chain governance to territorial-based approaches
BASIC OBSERVATIONS
Different ‘policy mixes’ [carrots and sticks] lead to different outcomes
The effectiveness of market-driven mechanism is still under question
Commitments from end-buyers to specific targets have proven crucial
Commitments can be based on certification [palm oil] but not always [beef]
In some cases [Brazil], they are complemented or driven by public policy
In others [Indonesia], they are conflicting with existing policy frameworks
Much depends on what is catalyzing public and private convergence
The resultant socio-environmental trade-offs are not always clear …
nor who are the actors reaping the benefits along the value chain
PUBLIC AND PRIVATE INTERACTIONS
GLOBAL
SUB-NATIONAL
Incentives
Regulations
Policies
POLICY REGIMES
Upstream
Downstream
Investment strategies Procurement policies Supply chain management Business operations
Tenure Land use Zoning Industrial Infrastructure
Fiscal Commercial Financial
Macro
Sectoral
LANDSCAPES
SUPPLY CHAINS
Technologies
Markets
Institutions
MEDIATING FACTORS
“Sticks, carrots and sermons”
Finance andinvestments
Global and regional trade
Policies [ESG integration]
Finance sector initiatives
Codes of conduct
Import regulations
Voluntary standard systems
Mandatory sustainability
standards
EP SCC PRI
Transnational processes
CFS-RAI, VGGT
Self-regulatory commitments
HOW TO UNDERSTAND AND TRIGGER CHANGE? Polycentric systems (decision-making is distributed)
Non-linear causality (associated to complex systems)
Incremental change (at different places and levels)
Multiple feedback loops (positive and negative)
For sustainability, needed to closing performance gaps
Management, investment, benefits, environmental.
AND, required to address critical structural factors
Policy and implementation failures
Market asymmetries and distortions
Unequal power relationships
BEEF CATTLE IN THE BRAZILIAN AMAZON
Total cattle population
81Million heads
Slaughterhouses
95In the Brazilian Legal
Amazon
Cattle population in smallholdings
20%out of total BLA
Pasture lands
60%out of total
deforested lands
Cattle population
38%out of total in the
country
Stocking ratio
1.0Head/ha
3corporate groups
control most of the supply
BRAZILIAN SUCCESS … STILL SOME WAY TO GO
Public sector taking the lead – yet commitment from industry was key
BUT also local territorial agreements at municipal level [green municipalities]
Public and private actions effective for reducing deforestation at large-scale
Beef industry cut out suppliers that were considered risky suppliers
BUT, unable to control leakage and laundry [as it could be expected]
AND, smallholders increased their relative participation in deforestation
Few incentives to support an agrarian transition to more intensive land uses
AND, solutions do not work in favor of medium- and small-scale suppliers
Often good practices work only for the most large-scale and capitalized ranchers
AND, solutions to intensification tend to rely too much on chemical inputs
A FEW CONSTRAINTS TO INTENSIFICATION
Legal and institutional obstacles to intensification:
• Land tenure, a long awaited but still little realistic goal
• Credit is available but conditions do not make it accessible
• Technological options are based on chemical inputs
Interesting land-use dynamics emerging:• Deforestation mainly occurred in areas
close to rivers for cattle raising• New deforestation tends to expand in
clayey soils (preferred to soy production)• Soy production tends to take over the best
pasture lands [not the more degraded]
Deforestation accordant to solil type in Paragominas Piketty et al. 2015 Forests
LESSONS FROM PUBLIC – PRIVATE ARRANGEMENTS
Clear legal frameworks and distribution of responsibilities among different levels of government
Enforce regulations consistently based on transparent monitoring open to the wider society
Governments at intermediate levels play a key role in land registration, planning and enforcement
Institutional mechanisms to make individual producers and company buyers accountable
Economic policy instruments (public credit, fiscal transfers) to support environmental regulations
Agreements among key actors (e.g. retailers, industry and state) and compliance monitoring
CONTRASTING DYNAMICS: BRAZIL AND INDONESIA
Brazil and Indonesia are two quite contrasting cases
Much land available in Brazil when compared to Indonesia
AND, palm oil and beef sector respond to different market dynamics
BUT, at the same time there are several commonalities
• Traceability a major issue under complex supply chain networks
• Smallholders left behind due to company commitments
• Industry captures the benefits vis-à-vis upstream suppliers
• Leakage effects expected, and indirect social outcomes
Indonesia is also a more complex case of public-private interactions
AND, disparate sustainability standards not clearly harmonized
10.5Million hectares
cultivated
Labor
3.0Million people
27.8Million tons CPO
Smallholders
42%of total cultivated
area
~600Palm oil mills
25corporate groups control most of
the supply
Indonesia
3.5Tons CPO/ha/yr
53%global CPO supply
PALM OIL IN INDONESIA
Farmers
2.1Million households
INDONESIA, PERSISTENCE AMIDST CHANGE
Palm oil production contributes to national earnings but negative environmental effects
Ambiguous sectoral policies for palm oil expansion, economic growth and poverty alleviation
Major corporate groups have been making bold commitments towards sustainability
Strong open opposition from Indonesian government to ‘zero deforestation’ movement
Some governments at the sub national level are embracing some policy innovations
Expansion of medium-scale investments and multiplication of independent mills
Smallholders filling out the spaces that were not occupied by oil palm plantations
MANY STANDARDS FOR THE SAME DROP OF PALM OIL
Between voluntary and mandatory sustainability standards
Many standards are adopted for the same drop of palm oil
• RSPO, ISPO, ISCC
Contrasting views on definitions of sustainability [under refinement]
RSPO [slow adoption but grows over time], RSPO Next [its uptake is little realistic], ISPO [implementation is also behind schedule] / RSPO and ISPO converge on several issues, but diverge in key ones
AND, also no common definitions of [high-carbon] forests
• HCV under RSPO, HCS and HCS+ [being harmonized]
Harmonization is still a long way to go [but is it desirable?]
Much of the development driven by end-buyers
THE POLITICS OF ZERO DEFORESTATION
Bold commitments of five major palm oil conglomerates to zero deforestation:
• Putting in place traceability systems [from refineries to mills]
• Significant difficulties to trace third-party and independent suppliers
• Important pressure from Greenpeace to make and disclose progress
Strong opposition from the government under a dual rationale:
• Commitments risks excluding smallholders from markets
• Foreign corporate-driven rules clash with national regulations
IPOP companies accused of collusion and anti-competitive behaviors
• Alleged of using environmental standards as pretext
• Violation of Law No. 5/1999 [monopoly and business competition]
ATTEMPTS FROM GOVERNMENT TO REFORM POLICIES
Moratoria to conversion of primary forests and peatlands [since 2011]
Measures to stop oil palm development in peatlands [Oct 2015]
Measures for peatland restoration in areas affected by fires [Oct 2015]
New measures to stop granting of oil palm concessions [Abril 2016]
BUT, at the same time:
• Expand domestic market for biodiesel through subsidies
• Attempts to incentivize development of downstream industry
• Efforts to diversify markets [beyond China and India]
• Support recognition of tenure rights for smallholders
Policy ambiguities, and tensions among levels of government
PUBLIC – PRIVATE INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS
RSPO certification only comprises a few major corporate groups
Adoption of ISPO mandatory sustainability standards is still low
Not clear mechanisms for control of independent mills
No definition on tenure rights between customary and statutory
Many (illegal) smallholders not entitled to receive state support
Difficulties for monitoring given constraints to disclosure of permits
Incentives for downstream investments and expansion of
biodiesel domestic markets still triggers expansion of plantations
Enough sources of finance for plantations development, much of
those through national banks and informal lending systems
LINKING TENURE, SUPPLY AND BUSINESS MODELS
Assessing patterns of supply chains and networksacross different regions and groups (based on secondary data) [3 groups, 44 refineries, ~900 mills, 2500 estates]
Mapping smallholder lands, identification of smallholder types, and analysis of business models with options for upgrading the production systems of smallholders (Riau, Central and West Kalimantan)
Assessing de facto land uses versus legal allocations to determine (e.g. smallholders within concessions, and industrial palm oil plantations outside concession lands)
Monitoring the direct (e.g. land use, GHG, employment), and indirect impacts of commitments (e.g. land use pressures, smallholder inclusion, livelihoods displacement)
EMERGING PERSPECTIVES
Increasing control and incentives in the supply chains- Extend the traceability from direct to indirect suppliers- Monitor and rewards for improvements in performance- Technical assistance with flexible technological packages
Lowering risk and increasing investment attractiveness- Land regularization and clarification of tenure rights- Land taxation with differentiated rates depending on use- Integrating environmental criteria in commercial lending
Jurisdictional and/or territorial arrangements- Systems to monitor social and environmental performance- Fiscal incentives to support good environmental performance- Policies of preferential sourcing by processors/industry- Assessment (and certification?) of territorial performance