Palm oil certification schemes
Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) The RSPO has relatively strong environmental and social standards on paper, including recently requiring no deforestation through implementing the High Carbon Stock Approach (HCSA). It also has moderately strong multi-stakeholder governance structures and good levels of transparency. However, implementation of its standards is often weak, with serious audit failures being reported, many members failing to meet the full range of membership requirements and grievances slow to be addressed. CBs are contracted directly by clients who are seeking to be certified, causing conflicts of interest, and both NGOs and the RSPO’s own accreditation body report widespread and systemic failure to uphold the RSPO standards. Another major weakness is with the RSPO’s reliance on mass balance and book and claim supply chain models, where untraced, uncertified palm oil is mixed with certified product. While the more expensive identity preserved and segregated options can ensure certified oil is kept separate throughout the supply chain, overall RSPO certified oil cannot be guaranteed to be free of deforestation or human rights abuses.
Governance and decision making
• The RSPO is a multi-stakeholder body
in whose establishment WWF played an important role.1 However, over time its membership has become dominated by business2 and it has limited structures or rules to ensure other members, such as civil society and environmental organisations, are fairly represented, including in the General Assembly’s decision making.3 With the exception of smallholders, some of whom are Indigenous, Indigenous Peoples and local communities are also largely not directly involved in the RSPO’s governance system, despite (as landholders) being important stakeholders.4
1
RSPO, About [Website]
2 RSPO, Impact: RSPO in numbers [Website] 3 The RSPO has recently changed its voting rules to allocate NGOs 25% of the vote, but still requires a simple majority of votes to pass a resolution at the General Assembly (see RSPO (2019, 6 November)). In contrast, the FSC has three equal social, environmental and economic chambers, and a resolution must have majority support in all chambers to pass; see FSC, Membership chambers [Website]. 4 Colchester, M. (2016) p.158, McInnes, A. (2017) pp.3435,37
68
Chapter 3: Analysis of the major certification schemes
• The RSPO is a Code Compliant member of the ISEAL Alliance.5
Standards
• On paper, the RSPO has strong requirements
with regard to community and human rights, including FPIC, participatory mapping and a documented grievance procedure.6 However, as RSPO member Forest Peoples Programme admits, industry noncompliance is prevalent (see below).7
• In November 2018, the RSPO made the
significant step of voting to incorporate ‘no deforestation’ and the HCSA into its palm oil certification standards.8 Prior to the 2018 amendments, RSPO standards required the protection of only some types of forest (‘primary’ forest and HCV areas). Members that are growers are now also required to protect areas of natural forest
5 ISEAL Alliance, ISEAL community members [Website] 6 RSPO (2018d), Efeca (2016), McInnis, A. (2017) pp.6-10 7 Forest Peoples Programme (2015, 1 June) 8 RSPO (2018c)
