You can refer to our 2030 Strategic Plan here. During the National Roundtable meeting, we listed some emerging issues or topics that were seen to be increasingly relevant or potentially not being addressed by GRSB.
Land rights and Human rights featured in this list. Both of these are being addressed by our Social Impact Working Group. The goal relates primarily to equity, equality and living wage, but we have also established sub-groups that are taking a deeper dive into indigenous rights and the issues of nutrition and the role of beef in sustainable diets.
The morning's discussion on communication with Andrea Bertaglio was on how you cannot answer an emotional argument with science, and considered how to answer public and political concerns with a message that is still predominantly scientific.
Your answer may and should be based on science, but the emotional discussion is the driver. This will need more input from our communications group, as they did not meet in Bologna.
We still have not cracked how best to communicate most effectively outside our own group. One of the topics that may be interesting to use for this is the role of cattle in circular food systems. We know that the majority of feed / fodder is not human edible and that manure, slurry and digestate are all valuable fertilisers, but many outside of the livestock industry probably have very little understanding of the role that livestock play in the overall farming systems of their countries.
There are numerous examples of politicians making absurd statements about agriculture which demonstrate that policy makers are not always as well informed as we would hope them to be.
ESG and reporting standards are increasingly important, and since there is a wide range used by members already, GRSB can play a role in sharing information about tools to facilitate reporting. The Climate working group is planning webinars on both, as well as producing guidance and FAQs on them.
Associated with both this and the communications piece is the need for increased vigilance against greenwashing. When we make goals and our members make commitments, these are to be delivered upon, and data to support progress is essential. So clearly science and data are always an important part of the basis of what we communicate, even when we are responding to more emotional arguments. Finding the balance is our challenge.
Quality and consistency of beef product was one of the issues raised, at least for Europe (and no doubt for some other regions). This probably strays beyond GRSB's purview, though it is important to our members. It does relate to sustainability in the economic realm, as consumers may lose faith in a product if they do not get the consistency in eating quality they expect.
One of the issues for Europe is that over the years there has been a move to lower fat in beef, which does create challenges when it comes to eating quality. Also, due to the ban on hormone use, more bulls are kept entire until slaughter, which will also have a knock on effect.
Grasslands and savannahs are the cornerstone of the beef industry, and are also amongst some of the most endangered ecosystems. One of the challenges faced by these grassy ecosystems is that they are often categorised as being suitable for "reforestation", but in actual fact what is taking place is 'afforestation' of a light understory biome that evolved with grasses, herbivory and fire.-
This nuance is missed even by organisations such as FAO, whose definition of "Forest" covers vast areas of savannah. Why is this important? Because now, in times of climate action, tree planting is seen as a one size fits all solution. Any ecosystem that is not producing human edible crops and is devoid of trees is seen as being ripe for planting. As a result, countries in Africa have pledged to "replant" 70 million ha (180 million acres) of land that was not forest in the first place. It might seem a tenuous point, but maintenance of grassland ecosystems that store carbon predominantly underground is every bit as important as preserving forests.
Water is another very hot topic. We have mentioned it before, but to date we do not have any workstream focused on water use, quality and availability. It is part of our Principles and Criteria, so I feel that we should be addressing water more directly. Given that our Nature Positive Working group already has plenty to do, it may be a topic for a separate group of participants to start working on.
Climate impacts in terms of disease vectors, animal disease and welfare was also noted as another area that is garnering increased attention – this should align with our Animal Health and Welfare Working Group in terms of tools and training to deal with heat stress, as well as awareness of vectors and emerging disease threats.
The tours showed us some elements of the role cattle play, beyond simply provision of beef. We first visited a tannery. This was the first tannery in a developed country that I have visited. Thankfully, it was a world away from those in Ethopia, India and Morocco that I have seen before.
What is so interesting about the leather industry is the fact that they take a by-product and create a very high quality and high value product from it. It seems that they are having some success in convincing car manufacturers that their product really is the sustainable option when compared to fossil fuel based man made alternatives.
Following the tannery, we stopped off at the largest biomethane plant in Europe. There are not a lot of moving parts on view, but this plant takes the problem of dealing with manure out of the hands of surrounding farmers, who are required to report on all nutrients applied on their land.
