Since the closing date is the 31st January, time is short. Such a submission will require board approval and, in order to gauge their opinion, I have consulted with our Executive Committee and a number of members whom I thought were well qualified to comment.
The project that ILRI is looking to undertake, and that we would be proposing to implement for them, is the development of a Global Rangelands Standard and Certification.
While GRSB has long viewed that a Global Standard would be challenging to develop and implement, I am concerned that if GRSB is not involved in this, in at least an advisory capacity, the standard could undermine the work we and our national roundtables are doing.
We should bear in mind that some of our national roundtables have frameworks that are either already generating certified product, or have the capacity to do so with third party involvement. Several of our NGO members have experience in the development of standards and some of our members closer to the consumer have an interest in using standards.
So there are a number of factors that certainly justify GRSBs involvement and that could cement and strengthen our role in sustainable livestock circles. This is also a funded project, so we know it will happen whether we tender or not. My feeling is that it is better to be sitting at the table on such things than to be outside of the process.
A number of useful comments have come from members to help decide whether this is the right place for us to be exerting effort:
Cost: Do we have the capacity and resources to undertake this work without compromising other work streams?
This is an important consideration. The project needs to be fully funded and not take away from our core functions and existing work streams. For all projects, including our Roadmap projects, we have to have a full budget allocation before commencing. For the development of our proposal, we must take into consideration the extra time and expertise required and budget accordingly.
The project duration is 20 months, and the fees are paid in 4 installments on achievement of milestones, so there is an element of pre-financing prior to reimbursement.
Value: To whom is this standard going to be valuable?
That certainly depends upon the standard and how it is developed. Again, from my point of view, a prescriptive global standard would be doomed to failure, since rangelands are so varied (as GRSB has always maintained) that prescriptions that seem valid in one place are unlikely to be valid in another, or even in the same place in another year since one hallmark of rangeland ecology is disequilibrium.
So would a standard based on outcomes meet the mark? Could something so high level be of value, or would it require multiple national interpretations to become usable?
Beyond the implementation of the project itself, could we build a value proposition for GRSB itself and our members in the future?
Market: Who would use such a certification?
Major brands and retailers are likely to source product from mainstream value chains. While rangelands cover a large proportion of the planet, the majority of product will come either from a mixture of rangelands and other sources, or entirely from non-native grassland and crop feed sources.
Significant areas of rangelands occur in Africa, from where the export of meat is a challenge on sanitary grounds. Degradation in African rangelands is a hugely complicated topic, influenced by multiple factors including burgeoning human population, land tenure systems, crop encroachment, livestock and wildlife mobility and interactions including endemic diseases and human wildlife conflict.
I suspect that there would be a niche market for leather and fibre from such African systems, but would it be large enough?
Future: What can we expect to see in the future if such a standard is developed?
As mentioned above, I suspect that little of the product that finally enters markets is entirely derived from rangelands, but could a standard be leveraged to restrict market access?
We need to consider the consequences of the existence of such a standard for producers and particularly those in developing countries who might find themselves out of scope through no fault of their own.
In short, the idea of a Global Standard appeals to a certain group of people, but the practicalities and nuances are very complex. While I would rather be involved than left outside, I do wonder about the value and uses of such a standard.
I would certainly welcome your thoughts on this. If you would like to be part of such an effort and/or if you have opinions either way about the tender, please let me know.
