Round Table on Responsible Soy (RTRS

RTRS certification is often considered by the industry as one of the best of its kind, with buyers making the claim that if they purchase 100% RTRS soya, they are supporting sustainable production.1 But this is a highly problematic claim, as the vast majority of RTRS soya sales are based on credits, rather than physical flows of soya. Buyers thus might not know whether the producers of the actual products they are buying are engaging in deforestation or other ecosystem destruction. Buying credits is supposedly intended to encourage farmers to produce responsible soya, but the premium farmers receive for credits is too low to compensate them for not clearing land for soya production. As a result it is likely that most certified farms would not have engaged in land conversion even without the RTRS. On top of that, companies can sell RTRS soya or credits from their certified farms while still deforesting on non-certified farms. Claims of supporting sustainable production are therefore misleading, allowing companies a green image even if they are still contributing to human rights abuses and/or the destruction of nature.

1 See RTRS, RTRS claims [Website].

Governance and decision making

• The RTRS was initially conceived in 2004 by a committee whose members – Grupo

Amaggi, Unilever, COOP, WWF, Dutch development organisation Cordaid and

Brazilian smallholder organisation Fetraf-Sul – came together to prepare an international conference on responsible soya. The scheme was formally established in 2006, but

Cordaid and Fetraf-Sul reportedly left the organisation committee in 2005 because they disagreed with not excluding GMO soya from the RTRS standard.2 • The General Assembly is the RTRS’s highest decision-making body. All members, including both participants and observers, take part, though only participating members have a vote.3

• The RTRS’s Executive Board is composed of a maximum of 15 representatives from each of the three member constituencies (producers; industry, trade and finance; civil society), which all have the same voting rights regardless of their share in membership.4 • The RTRS is a Community Member of the

ISEAL Alliance.5

2 The RTRS’s principles and criteria were finalised in 2010, after a series of consultations. See Hospes, A., van der Valk, O., & van der Mheen-Sluijer, J. (2012) pp.38-43. 3 RTRS, Who we are [Website]; see also RTRS, Members [Website]. 4 RTRS, Who we are [Website] 5 ISEAL Alliance, ISEAL community members [Website]

Standards

• The RTRS production standard is a relatively strong standard on natural ecosystem conversion as it forbids any conversion of

‘natural lands’ after June 2016.6 • For areas critical for biodiversity (hotspots), which includes nearly all the Brazilian

Amazon, the cut-off date is May 2009.7 This means that although newly converted land is not eligible for RTRS certification, historical conversion is accepted, except in HCV areas. • National interpretations of the standard are available, taking into account differences in regulations and production standards.8 • The RTRS allows GMO soya but ensures that it is not mixed with non-GMO certified material.9

Traceability and transparency

• There are two ways to buy RTRS certified soya. The first is in the form of credits, where producers are granted one credit for each tonne of certified soya they produce, and buyers can purchase credits to support responsible soya production (but not the actual soya itself). The second is by purchasing physical flows of certified soya.10

Both options are available via the RTRS’s online trading platform, and non-GMO options exist for both.11 • The vast majority of RTRS soya sales are based on credits rather than physical flows of soya.12 As with all such systems, buyers risk inadvertently supporting deforestation, as they do not know whether the producer of the actual product they are buying is involved in deforestation or not.13 Although companies that buy credits can only claim that they are

6 RTRS (2017) pp.23-24 7 RTRS (2017) pp.23-24 8 RTRS, National interpretations [Website] 9 RTRS (2018) pp.19-21 10 RTRS, RTRS soy [Website] 11 RTRS, Marketplace [Website], and RTRS soy [Website] 12 Data on credits buyers and physical soya buyers is available from the RTRS Marketplace. See RTRS, Marketplace [Website]. 13 RTRS, RTRS soy [Website]

supporting sustainable production,14 and not that they are buying deforestation-free products, this still allows the companies a green image. • When RTRS certified physical material is purchased, it is monitored throughout the supply chain, and certification applies to both producers and supply chain actors. There are three supply chain models: segregated, mass balance, and country material balance (a mass balance accounting system implemented at the national level).15 • Updates on certified producers and certified volumes are available in the Marketplace section of the RTRS website.16 Annual audit reports contain information on certified farms and their locations, and producer audits are published on the RTRS website.17 • The RTRS has a grievance procedure,18 but it was only published in mid-2020 and the RTRS claims that no complaints have been received since then. This makes it impossible to say how complaints are dealt with.

Audits

• RTRS-endorsed accreditation bodies are responsible for accrediting and auditing CBs for the scheme.19

• The RTRS requires CBs to consult with affected stakeholders during audits, contributing to the level of assurance the scheme offers.20

• Producer audits are only carried out on a producer’s certified farms and not at the whole producer or company level.21 This means that companies can sell RTRS soya or credits from their certified farms while still being involved in deforestation on non-certified farms.

14 See RTRS, RTRS claims [Website]. 15 RTRS, RTRS soy [Website]; see also RTRS (2018). 16 RTRS, Marketplace - Certified volumes and producers [Website] 17 RTRS, Public audit reports [Website] 18 RTRS (2019) 19 RTRS, What are the benefits of RTRS certification? [Website] 20 Kusumaningtyas, R., & van Gelder, J. W. (2019) p.21 21 RTRS (2017)

© Otto Ramos / Greenpeace 25 July 2017 - Amapá, Brazil. A soya plantation in a Cerrado area within the Amazon.

Implementation and effectiveness

• The premium farmers receive for credits (reportedly around 0.5% of the soya price)1 is not seen as a sufficient incentive to discourage them from engaging in land conversion. As a result it is likely that most certified farms would not have engaged in land conversion even without the RTRS.

They are mostly located in areas with a long agricultural history.2 • SLC Agrícola is an example of a soya producer in the Cerrado that has RTRS certification for some of its farms3 but has reportedly engaged in repeated large-scale deforestation on other farms which are not certified (see box ‘RTRS &

ProTerra implementation failure – Alleged greenwashing of soya from SLC Agrícola,

Brazil, for Lidl’ on page 44).5

1 Solidaridad (2020, 9 April) 2 Cameron, B. (2017) 3 SLC Agrícola, Our farms [Website] 5 Chain Reaction Research (2020, 17 April) and Chain Reaction Research (2019, 9 May)