Responsible dev. ............PDF

Responsible Development of New Oil Palm
Plantings – RSPO’s Approach*
The Planter, Kuala Lumpur, 92 (1080):000-0000 (2016)
Plantings – RSPO’s Approach*
SANATH KUMARAN AND SALAHUDIN YAACOB
Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO Secretariat), Unit A-37-1, Menara UOA Bangsar,
No.5 Jalan Bangsar Utama 1, 59000 Kuala Lumpur
The Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) was established in 2004 to promote the production and
use of sustainable palm oil for people, planet and prosperity. The RSPO is a non-profit multi-stakeholder
initiative which has a vision to “transform the markets to make sustainable palm oil the norm” and has a
mammoth task ahead to materialise this vision. This paper provides information on the RSPO New
Planting Procedure and compares it with feasibility studies carried out by growers and investors.
The RSPO NewPlanting Procedure (NPP)is aprocess that is requiredpriortoactual landdevelopment
by RSPO members. The main aim of the NPP is to have a knowable and transparent a priori knowledge as
to the compliance of the new planting criteria. The member prepares the plan, verifies it through a thirdto the compliance of the new planting criteria. The member prepares the plan, verifies it through a third
party assessor and the results of the independent verificationis posted on the RSPO website for30 daysfor
public comments. The NPP is not a standard but acts as a process to ensure that the member and RSPO
would know at an early stage, if there were any non-compliance of the RSPO standard.
The RSPONPP was proposed on 20 November 2008, formalised in May 2009 and came into effect for
all newoil palm plantings from 1 January 2010. Prior to 2008, knowledge of the compliance to the RSPO
newplantings criteria was ‘post-priori’. As such, the NPP is seen as a powerful risk-management tool for
RSPO members. RSPO would be aware of any misinterpretation of the standard that had occurred at an
early stage.
Keywords: New planting procedure, oil palm, RSPO, high conservation value, FPIC.
Palm oil is one of the most closely scrutinised
and heavilydebatedcommodities of thetwenty
Attempting to accommodateboth perspectives
and exercise a degree of caution, manyand heavilydebatedcommodities of thetwenty
first century. Ononehand, civilsocietyreports
routinely expose alleged environmental and
human rights violations caused by the palm oil
industry, which is identified as a significant
driver of tropical deforestation. On the other
hand, the commodity is considered the
economic backbone of both Malaysia and
Indonesia (which together produceover 80 per
cent of the world’s supply and is hailed by
proponentsasthehighestyieldingmulti-purpose
vegetable oil and a ‘sustainable’ and
‘renewable’ material for poverty alleviation.
and exercise a degree of caution, many
underscore the need to improve understanding
of the measurable impacts of the industry and
particularly with the increased demand for
palmoil, theneed for responsibledevelopment
of new plantings.
The Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil
(RSPO) was established in 2004 to promote
the production and use of sustainable palm oil
for people, planet and prosperity. The RSPO
isanon-profitmulti-stakeholderinitiativewhich
has a vision to “transform the markets to make
sustainable palm oil the norm” and has a
1
‘renewable’ material for poverty alleviation. sustainable palm oil the norm” and has a
* Editedversion ofpaper presented at: Soil and Plantation Management Seminar:UnlockingKnowledge to
Maximise Productivity, 16 February 2016 organised by the ISPSelangor/Wilayah Persekutuan Branch
andtheMalaysianGhentGraduatesatPerdanaBallroom,PalmGardenHotel,IOIResort,Putrajaya,Malaysia.

mammothtask ahead tomaterialisethis vision.
This paper provides information on the RSPO
New Planting Procedures (NPPs) which was
their expansion plans. Only after verification
by RSPO Certification Bodies (CBs) (http://
www.rspo.org/certification/bodies) that are
Responsible development of new oil palm plantings - RSPO’s approach
New Planting Procedures (NPPs) which was
formalised in May 2009 and approved by the
RSPOExecutiveBoard inSeptember 2009 for
implementation from 1 January 2010, and
subsequent updates with its relation to the
RSPO standard or better known as RSPO
Principles and Criteria for the production of
sustainablepalmoilor inshorttheRSPOP&C.
This paper is written with the intention to
present the RSPO NPP which is to have a
priori knowledge as to the compliance of
RSPO members with the new planting criteria
in the RSPO P&C. In essence, NPP provides
a framework for responsible development
www.rspo.org/certification/bodies) that are
accredited by the Accreditation Services
International (http://www.accreditation-
services.com/) (ASI), that the social and
environmentalrequirements havebeenmet,can
the new planting operation commence. Apart
fromCertificationBodies verification, thenew
plantingoperationscanonlybeginafteralllegal
requirements have also been met.
The NPP is a tool consisting of a set of
assessments and verification activities
conductedbyCertificationBodies andgrowers
prior to a newoil palmdevelopment. This tool
istosupportandguideresponsiblenewoilpalma framework for responsible development
of new lands for oil palm. The RSPO New
Planting Procedure (NPP) requires RSPO
members who own and manage oil palm
concessions toannouncetheir expansionplans.
The authors’ view is that the NPP can
complement feasibility studies carried out by
investors or companies for new plantings.
TheNPPis normally carriedout byRSPO
members (oilpalmgrowers andprocessors and
traders), prior tolands plannedor proposed for
oil palm plantings but upon which no work
towards that end has commenced. As part of
istosupportandguideresponsiblenewoilpalm
plantings which will support the member in
preparation for certification assessment under
the RSPOPrinciples andCriteria (P&C). The
NPP applies to any development of new
plantings, regardless of size. The intention of
NPP, primarily is to have a priori knowledge
as tothecomplianceofthenewplantingcriteria
in the RSPO P&C, viz., on primary forests,
High Conservation Values (HCVs), high
carbonstocks (HCS),fragileandmarginalsoils
andlocalpeople’s lands fromnegativeimpacts.
The successful implementation of the NPPtowards that end has commenced. As part of
the Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC)
process,notificationwillbeplacedontheRSPO
website to provide opportunity for the public,
localcivilsocietyorganisationsandcommunities
to discuss with thecompanyall relatedmatters
beforethestart ofnewoperations. This process
also provides local communities opportunities
to participate in smallholder schemes and can
be viewed as a commitment to transparency
and risk mitigation step by theRSPO member.
BACKGROUND
The successful implementation of the NPP
ensures that relevant indicators of Principle 7
of the RSPO P&C are being followed and
therefore in compliance with the requirements
of RSPO when new development begins.
One of the outcomes of the NPP
assessment is a report that proposes how and
where new oil palm plantings should proceed,
or not, for a given management unit/area. The
NPPreport is thenpostedontheRSPOwebsite
for public comments and/or notification for a
period of 30 days. This public consultation is
an opportunity for public feedback and
2
BACKGROUND
The RSPO NPP implemented since 1 January
2010requires itsmemberstopubliclyannounce
an opportunity for public feedback and
comments, and if the comments are not
adequately addressed or resolved, the
comments may be escalated to become a

complaint. Planting of oil palm and associated
development (e.g. such as road and canal
construction), can only begin once the NPP
RSPO-approved HCVAssessor list,
which is now obsolete (as of 31 Dec
2014). The ALS is effective from
The Planter, Vol. 92, No. 1080, March 2016
construction), can only begin once the NPP
process is completed, the Certification Body
(CB) verification is conducted and all legal
requirements have been met.
PURPOSE
The NPP was formalised in May 2009,
following its proposal at the RSPO General
Assembly in November 2008. Later, the NPP
was approved by the RSPO Executive Board
in September 2009 and came into effect for all
new oil palm plantings from 1 January 2010.
Then, the NPP was introduced with the aim to
2014). The ALS is effective from
1 January 2015.
The above requirements led to the NPP
being updated and approved by the RSPO
Board of Governors on 20 November 2015
which came into effect on 1 January 2016.
This newNPPdocument(http://www.rspo.org/
certification/new-planting-procedures) will be
revised following each revision of the RSPO
P&C.
NEW PLANTING PROCEDURES
AND FEASIBILITY STUDIES
Then, the NPP was introduced with the aim to
provide a framework for responsible
development of new lands for oil palm. The
early NPP documents rangein date from2010
to2012.
In 2013, the RSPO P&C was revised and
updated. With thecurrent RSPO P&C (2013)
in place, a number of updates were needed to
aligntheoriginal NPPdocuments withthenew
requirements of the RSPO P&C (2013),
especially:
� Criterion7.3:amendedtorequirethat
AND FEASIBILITY STUDIES
It is a common practice for investors and
grower companies to carry out feasibility
studies to ascertain the cost implications, risks
involved and the IRR of any new proposed
investments/plantings. The feasibility studies
primarily focusses on the potential economic
returns of the investment with the focus to
maximise profits, reduce costs, improve
efficiencyand minimisewastes, amongothers.
The focus of feasibility studies are more from
a business anglewith emphasis on production,� Criterion7.3:amendedtorequirethat
a land use change analysis (LUCA)
from November 2005 shall be
conducted prior to any conversion or
newplanting,
� Criterion 7.8: requires that new
plantationdevelopments aredesigned
to minimise net greenhouse gas
(GHG)emissions,takingintoaccount
avoidance of land areas with HCS
and/or sequestration options, and
� Endorsement of the High
Conservation Value Resource
a business anglewith emphasis on production,
marketing and finance.
On theother hand, theNPPintends tohave
a priori knowledge as to the compliance of
the new planting criteria in the RSPO P&C,
viz., on primary forests, HCVs, HCSs, fragile
andmarginalsoilsandlocal/indigenouspeoples’
lands fromnegative impacts. This tool is seen
as an endeavour to more strongly enforce
existing rules on transparency.
The primary differences and similarities
between elements of feasibility studies and
NPPare shown in Table 1. It is the opinion of
3
Conservation Value Resource
Network (HCVRN) Assessor
Licensing Scheme(ALS) as a robust
and credible replacement for the
NPPare shown in Table 1. It is the opinion of
the authors that the RSPO NPP can
complement feasibility studies in several areas
especially from the environment and social

TABLE1
MAINELEMENTSOFTYPICALFEASIBILITYSTUDIESANDRSPONEWPLANTINGPROCEDURE
Feasibility studies RSPO New Planting Procedure
Feasibility studies RSPO New Planting Procedure
1. Business overview 1. Social and environmental impact assessment
� Vision, mission, business objectives, (SEIA)
current business status, legal requirements, � Social impactson surroundingcommunities,
land tenure, security, political context current land use pattern, type of land owner-
2. Marketingplan ship and user rights, types of land to be used
� Product description, product packaging, (forests, degraded forests, cleared lands),
opportunity, target market, distribution and activities ofall major planned infrastructure,
deliverystrategy, competition includingplanting, mill operations, roads,etc.
3. Production plan 2. Soil and topographic information
� Description oflocation, estimated projected � Soil surveys and topographic information,
yields, project planting plan, agronomy, pest including identification of steep slopes,
and disease, soil survey and topographic marginal and fragile soils, areas prone toand disease, soil survey and topographic marginal and fragile soils, areas prone to
information, climate, oil mill establishment, erosion, degradation, subsidence and
production equipment, operation expenses, flooding, assessment of potential impacts on
human resources needs hydrology and land subsidence of planned
4. Financialplan development (particularlyon peat lands)
� Net Present Value (NPV), Internal Rate of 3. HCVassessment and primaryforests
Returns(IRR), financial assumptions, start- � HCV1-6 assessment done and wherepresent,
up capital estimation, loan security and the values are to be maintained and/or
repayment plan enhanced; Nonew planting since Nov 2005
5. SWOT analysis should have replaced primary forests or any
area neededtomaintain one or more HCVs;
Evidence of HCVs documented by a HCV
Resource NetworkALS licensed assessor
4. Carbon stock assessment and GHG emissions
Newplantingsis designedto minimise GHG� Newplantingsis designedto minimise GHG
emissions;Avoidance of development ofland
with high carbon stocks; Best Management
Practicesfor management and rehabilitation
ofnatural vegetation associatedwith oil palm
cultivation; watertable management; methane
capturefrom POME
5. Land use change analysis
� Done for management units that have been
clearedwithout prior HCVassessment
6. FPIC process
� To ensure that no new plantings are
established without the consent of local
people
4
people
� A documented system to establish the legal,
customaryor user rights is required

assessment.
If the NPP is done with the right intention,
many future obstacles such as potential land
would be considered. In a normal scenario,
the oil mill construction will begin in year 2 or
year 3 (Figure 1), especially considering the
many future obstacles such as potential land
conflictwithcommunallands,tensionfromlocal
communitieslandclaims,complaints byNGOs
against the RSPO members, health impacts
from pollution, etc. can be overcome. The
focus of the NPP is far and wide reaching,
compared to feasibility studies where the
emphasis ismoreontheprofitabilityandreturns
on investment. The NPP can be seen as a tool
formitigatingenvironmental[clearingofnatural
habitats(forests)impactingbiodiversity,clearing
ofpeatlands, increasedsoilvulnerability,release
ofGHGs,etc.]andsocial(displacementoflocal
year 3 (Figure 1), especially considering the
initialscout harvestingfortheinitialsmallyields
normally which begins 24-30 months after
planting. Planting in phases usually proceeds
for a few years.
Asanimportantconsiderationforcashflow
of the operations, and also that the initial crop
during year 3 is assumed to be insignificant,
theconstructionoftheoilmillwhichincurslarge
capitalisnormallywellthoughtoutandplanned.
Economically, a medium sized mill, say a
45-tonne FFB per hour should be able to cater
for crop coming from 8 000 ha to 10 000 ha of
people, loss of livelihoods, vulnerability to
flooding, changeinlocalproductiondynamics,
e.g. displacement of food crops and secondary
impacts e.g. siltation reducing access through
rivers, conflicts withlocals, etc.)risks resulting
from expansion ofoil palmproduction
In a typical feasibility study, prior to land
preparation,nurseryestablishment,theplanning
for the oil mill as a major infrastructure cost
for crop coming from 8 000 ha to 10 000 ha of
oilpalmplantings.
APPLICABILITY OF NPP
The RSPO P&C (2013) contains 8 Principles,
43 Criteria and 138 Indicators. For
management units which are due for
certificationassessment, themanagement units
havingnewplantingsmustcomplywithPrinciple
5
Figure 1 Simplified time line diagram for major activities of new oil palm plantings

7 of the RSPO P&C which is dedicated to
Responsible Development of New Plantings.
As a pre-certification step, it is the authors’
(see section on recent updates of this paper).
The requirements include:
� RSPO member planning a new
As a pre-certification step, it is the authors’
opinion that the RSPO NPP can be viewed as
an “advance Principle 7”.
For newoil palmplantings from1 January
2010, the RSPO requires that the NPP must
be implemented before a grower commences
land preparation, including any associated
development (SeeTable2 for clarifications and
exceptions). In case of not submitting the NPP
in time, sanctions willbeappliedas announced
� RSPO member planning a new
development: If a grower is an
RSPO member at the time of the
planning ofthenewdevelopment, the
grower must complete the NPP
process detailed in the process and
actions steps documented
� New land acquisitions by RSPO
members: If land clearing is actively
occurring at the time of acquisition,
TABLE2
DIFFERENTSCENARIOSFORNEWPLANTINGSANDUNDERSTANDINGWHENNPPDIFFERENTSCENARIOSFORNEWPLANTINGSANDUNDERSTANDINGWHENNPP
ISAPPLICABLE
Scenarios from 1 January 2010 NPP Certification 30-day public
Body (CB) comment period
verification
Conversion from natural vegetation to oil palm Yes Yes Yes
or from forest plantations or agroforestry to oil
palm. Including for undeveloped areas ofany
newacquisitions.
Conversion of abandoned agricultural land Yes Yes Yes
(undeveloped for > 3 years)
Conversion of existing agricultural land Yes No No, 30-day
(including landunder livestock ranches and notification only(including landunder livestock ranches and notification only
agricultural crops) tooil palm. Includingfor but no public
any new acquisitions. commentperiod
Replacing oil palm with a subsequent oil palm No N/A N/A
crop is considered as replanting and therefore
not subject tothe requirements of the NPP if
the previous oil palm crop has not been
abandonedfor morethan 3years.
For newplantings within an RSPO-certified No, as this N/A N/A
management unit case will be
audited against
Principle7
during
6
during
surveillanceor
recertification
audits

operations must cease completely
and the NPP requirements shall be
followed for any area that has not yet
with, and this includes coordination of
assessments, verification by the CB and
communication with RSPO.
followed for any area that has not yet
been converted.
� Where RSPO members have a
majority shareholding in and/
or management control of
subsidiaries, those subsidiaries are
subjected to the NPP requirement
(Refer to Certification System
document).
� If land clearance occurred after 1
January 2010: If land was
developed after 1 January 2010 and
did not comply with NPP
communication with RSPO.
All of the assessments are required in the
caseofsmallholders andoutgrowers, including
the same reporting requirements. RSPO
recognises that the assessment methods may
need to be adapted to the smallholder context
and the RSPO Secretariat will develop the
necessary guidance.
WHAT DOES THE NPP CONTAIN
The following section describes what NPP
entails. As mentioned above, NPP is ‘not’ a
standard but merely a process that comes inrequirements the grower has to
ensure compliance with Principle 7
at the time of certification. This may
bethecaseiflandclearanceoccurred
before the grower became an RSPO
member or for any new acquisitions
whereclearinganddevelopment have
already taken place.
For new plantings between November
2005 and 31 December 2009, the NPP does
not apply but the grower must comply with
RSPOPrinciple7 whichincludes requirements
standard but merely a process that comes in
prior tolandactualdevelopment.TheNPPcan
beviewed as a risk management tool toprotect
the member and could also be part of the
document check during the normal audit
process.
Social and environmental impact
assessment
It is acknowledged that oil palm development
can cause both positive and negative impacts.
Such developments can lead to indirect/RSPOPrinciple7 whichincludes requirements
such as FPIC, Social andEnvironment Impact
Assessment (SEIA), and HCV assessment.
Smallholders
As it stands, the RSPO NPP applies to
proposed new plantings by smallholders
(including scheme/associated and independent
smallholders) and outgrowers. If a company
leads the certification process for groups of
smallholders, then the company is responsible
for ensuring the NPP is complied with. In the
Such developments can lead to indirect/
secondary impacts which are not under the
controlof individualplantation companies and
millers. Assuch,growersshouldseektoidentify
the indirect impacts within the SEIA
framework, and where possible work with
partners to exploremechanisms to mitigatethe
negative indirect impacts and enhance the
positive impacts.
Forthis,a comprehensiveandparticipatory
independent social and environmental impact
assessment is to be undertaken prior to any
new plantings or operations, or expanding
7
for ensuring the NPP is complied with. In the
caseofGroupCertification,theGroupManager
is responsiblefor ensuringtheNPPis complied
new plantings or operations, or expanding
existing ones, and the results be incorporated
into planning, management and operations.

(RSPO C7.1). Socio-economic impacts both
to the country, region and local communities
as well as emergent communities (workers,
impacts onsurroundingcommunities
of a plantation, including analysis of
potential effects on livelihoods, and
as well as emergent communities (workers,
suppliers, etc.) is to be documented as well.
During the SEIA the assessors ought to
document issues raised by the various
stakeholders and provide comments as well.
Thelist oflegal documents, regulatorypermits
and property deeds related to the areas being
assessed needs to be cited and verified.
Theassessmentshouldinclude, atminimum
thefollowing:
� Assessment of the impacts of all
major planned activities, including
planting, mill operations, roads and
potential effects on livelihoods, and
differential effects on women versus
men,ethniccommunities, andmigrant
versus long-term residents, and
� Identification of activities that may
generate significant GHG emissions.
For smallholder schemes, the scheme
management shouldaddress Criterion7.1. For
individual smallholders, this Criteriondoes not
apply.
Where there is no National Interpretation,
for land areas greater than 500 ha, a full
independent assessment will be required. Forplanting, mill operations, roads and
other infrastructures,
� Assessment including stakeholder
consultation, of HCVs (see RSPO
C7.3) that could be negatively
impacted,
� Assessment of potential effects on
adjacent natural ecosystems of
planned developments, including
whether development or expansion
will increase pressure on nearby
natural ecosystems,
� Identification of watercourses and
independent assessment will be required. For
land areas less than 500 ha, an internal
assessment usingselectedcomponentsofSEIA
and HCV assessment can be used.
Soil and topography (steep areas, fragile
soils)
Inall feasibility studies for oilpalmplantations
development, soil surveys and topographic
information are given. Therefore, in NPP the
identificationofallareas ofmarginalandfragile
soils, including peat and riparian buffers is to� Identification of watercourses and
wetlands and assessment of potential
effects on hydrology and land
subsidenceofplanneddevelopments,
� Baselinesoilsurveys andtopographic
information, including the identifi-
cation of steep slopes, marginal and
fragile soils, areas prone to erosion,
degradation,subsidenceandflooding,
� Analysis of type of land to be used
(forests, degraded forests, cleared
land),
� Analysis of type of land ownership
soils, including peat and riparian buffers is to
be done. Identification of all steep areas of
excessive gradients (See RSPO C7.4) must
alsobedetermined. Plantingonextensiveareas
of peat lands and other fragile soils should be
avoided (RSPO C4.3) and where limited
plantingonfragileandmarginalsoilsisproposed,
plans shall be developed and implemented to
protect them without incurring adverse
impacts.
Soil suitabilitymaps or soilsurveys should
be appropriate to the scale of operation and
should include information on soil types,
topography, hydrology,rootingdepth,moisture
8
� Analysis of type of land ownership
and user rights,
� Analysis of current land use pattern,
� Assessment of potential social
topography, hydrology,rootingdepth,moisture
availability,stoninessandfertilitytoensurelong-
term sustainability of the development.

Primary forests and HCV assessment
RSPO is committed to the maintenance and
Evidence should also include historical
remote sensing imagery which demonstrates
that there has been no conversion of primary
RSPO is committed to the maintenance and
enhancement of HCVs and primary forest
conservation. Development should actively
seek to utilise previously cleared and/or
degraded land on mineral soil. Plantation
development should not put indirect pressure
on forests through the use of all available
agricultural land in an area. As such, one of
therequirementsofNPPisthatnonewplantings
since November 2005 should have replaced
primary forests or any area neededto maintain
or enhance one or more HCVs.
Evidence on the presence or absence for
that there has been no conversion of primary
forest or any area required to maintain or
enhance any HCVs. Satellite or aerial
photographs, land use maps and vegetation
maps should be used to inform the HCV
assessment. Where land has been cleared
since November 2005, and without prior and
adequate HCVassessment, it will be excluded
from the RSPO certification programme until
an adequateHCVcompensationplan has been
developed and accepted by the RSPO. For
HCV 5 and HCV 6, the management plan
developed must be adaptive to changes in theEvidence on the presence or absence for
all six HCV categories are to be documented
by a HCV Resource Network ALS licensed
assessor, through a detailed HCV assessment.
The Summary report of the HCV assessment
must follow the ALS template for HCV
Public Summary Reports available at
www.hcvnetwork.org/als. In the case, where
an HCV Resource Network licensed assessor
was not hired (e.g. for assessment conducted
before 1 January 2015), growers must follow
the following guidance:
� Decisions on presence or absence
developed must be adaptive to changes in the
values identified. Decisions will be made in
close consultation with the affected
communities.
A positive interaction is evident (see
Box 1).
Oncetheplantationshavebeenestablished,
new developments should comply with RSPO
C5.2, which is where rare, threatened or
endangered species or HCVs are present or
are affected by plantation or mill operations,
appropriate measures that are expected to
maintain and/or enhance them shall be� Decisions on presence or absence
for all six HCV categories
� Interpretation of the findings that led
to the decision on HCV presence/
absence. All decisions on HCV
presence/absence are adequately
justified and supported by evidence.
� Summaryofstakeholder consultation
must have the dates and stakeholder
details [name, title, role (unless
anonymityrequested),organisationor
social group, key concerns/
recommendations, maps showing
maintain and/or enhance them shall be
implemented through a management plan.
Carbon stock assessment and GHG
emissions
Carbon stock is the amount of carbon stored
in any given unit of land cover. For any land
cover, the total carbon stock can be divided
into different ‘pools’. The normal division of
carbon pools as defined by IPCC are above-
ground biomass, below-ground biomass, dead
wood, litter and soil organic matter.
The revised RSPO P&C (2013) has a new
9
recommendations, maps showing
location of HCVs and HCV
management areas]
The revised RSPO P&C (2013) has a new
Criterion 7.8 requiring that new plantation
development are to be designed to minimise

Box 1: Case study of PT Agro Wiratama
Back in 2011, PT Agro Wiratama, an
arerelativelylowandwillnot greatlyinfluence
the change in overall carbon stocks after
conversiontooilpalm. Thepeatlandsoilcarbon
Back in 2011, PT Agro Wiratama, an
Indonesian palm oil company has
relinquished over a thousand hectares of its
plantation land bankback tothe community
which is a breakthrough for RSPO. The
company which is a subsidiary of Musim
MasGroup obtaineda government permit to
develop an oil palm plantation on
9 000 hectares of land in West Kalimantan
but agreed to relinquish more than 1 000
hectares following intervention by local
communityandNGOs. Thisisa realexample
of how the NPP worked in the case of this
company where early notification of
conversiontooilpalm. Thepeatlandsoilcarbon
pool can change significantly on conversion to
plantationleadingtohighemissions.Therefore,
for the purpose of carbon stock assessment,
onlythecarbonintheabove-andbelow-ground
biomass andsoilorganic matter inpeat lands is
considered.
Tropical peat soils (Histosols) are defined as
organicsoilswith65%or more organicmatter
and a depth of50cm or more. (Source: RSPO
Manual on Peat BMP for Existing Oil Palm
Cultivation on Peat, 2012)company where early notification of
expansion plans andwillingness ofPTAgro
Wiratama toengagewiththe communityand
other stakeholders hasresultedin a win-win-
win scenario for everyone, including the
environment.Thisexampledemonstrateshow
carefulplanningwithrightvision andattitude
canbe acatalystfor sustainabledevelopment,
byshowingrespect forcommunities, generate
income through rubber, rice/paddy and for
wildlifeprotection.
Source: PT Musim Mas and WWF website
Improper agricultural practices or water
table management, lack of methane capture
from palm oil mill effluent (POME) treatment
and/or improper methanemanagement all lead
to GHG emissions.
The indicators of Criterion 7.8 include the
identificationandestimationofpotentialsources
ofemissionandsinks ofcarbonassociatedwith
new development. Another indicator is that
there shall be a plan to minimise GHG
emissions which takes into account avoidance
GHG emissions. In order to be in compliance
withRSPOC7.8(newplantationdevelopments
are designed to minimisenet GHG emissions),
informationofthecarbonstockintheproposed
new planting area needs to be combined with
a tool to ‘forecast’ the potential emission and
sequestration associated with a proposed new
development (see Figure 2).
RSPO considers above-ground biomass,
below-groundbiomass, andsoilorganicmatter
as the important pools where there are
significant changes as a result ofestablishment
emissions which takes into account avoidance
of development of land areas with high carbon
stocks and consideration of sequestration
options.
As such for NPP, land cover stratification
(maps and results of verification using ground
survey data such as participative survey data
and HCV data) or ground-truthing and
estimated carbon stock (tC/ha) for each land
cover stratum is to be determined. Maps are
to be created with description of all areas of
significant carbon stocks including areas of
peat. Identification of all likely significant
sources of GHG emission and sequestration
10
significant changes as a result ofestablishment
of an oil palm plantation. The soil organic
matter inpeat is significantlyhigher incontrast
to soil organic matter in mineral soils which
sources of GHG emission and sequestration
related to the proposed development is also
needed.Thegrower must provideconfirmation

Carbon stock assessment
Soil carbon estimation
Step 1: Use soil survey results,
maps and remote sensing
information to determine if peat
soils are present
Step 2: If areas of peat are present,
determine extent of peat area (ha),
average depth of peat (m) and
carbon stock of peat
Above and below ground carbon
estimation
Step 1: Obtain remote-sensing data of
project area
Step 2: Carry out GIS analysis of remote
sensing data and stratify land cover
according to what best captures the
variability of the area of interest
Step 3: Carry out ground-truthing to verify
accuracy of land stratification and modify
boundaries of land strata accordingly
Step 4a: Use default values for carbon stocks
of above- and below-ground biomass
(ton/ha) for the different strata
Step 4b: Estimate above ground biomass in
sample plots and use allometry to calculate
carbon stocks of above- and below-ground
biomass (ton/ha), for the different strata
Prepare report on carbon stock assessment
that the above has been undertaken using the
latest available version of the RSPO GHG
Assessment Procedure for estimating the
carbon stock of above-ground and below-
ground biomass for land earmarked for new
oil palmdevelopment andthat thepotential net
GHG emission arising from the development
has been estimated. The grower must also
confirm that the assessment includes a plan to
Figure 2 Flowchart for estimating carbon stock from land cover prior to new plantation development
(Source: RSPO GHGAssessment Procedurefor New Plantings, December 2014)
carbon stocks and/or sequestration options.
For carbon stock assessment, it is not
possible to provide detail information here in
this paper, hence a summarised flowchart is
presented. Descriptions for designing and
establishing sample plots and calculating
biomass are well documented in other
publications.
For new plantings where the NPP is
11
confirm that the assessment includes a plan to
minimise net GHG emissions which takes into
account avoidance of land areas with high
For new plantings where the NPP is
submitted from 1 January 2015 onwards,
complianceto C7.8 will bemandatory. Public

reporting of the requirements under Criterion
7.8remains voluntaryuntil31 December 2016.
Requirements under Criterion 7.8 will be
indigenous peoples have the right to determine
and develop priorities and strategies for the
development or use of their lands or territories
Requirements under Criterion 7.8 will be
reported to the RSPO Secretariat separately
as standalone document at the same time as
thestandardNPPreport. Itwillnotbeuploaded
onto theRSPO website. However, as required
under theRSPOP&C,it willbemadeavailable
to the ERWG. As of 1 January 2017, when
public reporting becomes mandatory, require-
ments under Criterion 7.8 will be published
together with the standard NPP report.
Land use/cover change analysis
Based on RSPO procedures, for all
development or use of their lands or territories
and other resources. FPIC is the right of
indigenouspeoples andotherlocalcommunities
togiveortowithholdtheirconsenttoanyproject
affecting their lands, livelihoods and
environment. This consent should be given or
withheld freely, meaning without coercion,
intimidation or manipulation, and it should be
given through the communities’ own freely
chosen representatives.
The consent should be sought prior to the
project going ahead (See Box 1 earlier). The
consent must be given in advance of any
Based on RSPO procedures, for all
management units that havebeen cleared(land
preparation) without prior HCV assessment
andLandUse/Cover ChangeAnalysis (LUCC)
analysis must be submitted for the entire
management unit. The RSPO Compensation
Process requires thata landusechangeanalysis
be conducted to determine the vegetation
status in November 2005 (or as close to this
time as possible), based on interpretation of
remotesensingdata. This willserveas a proxy
for thepossibleloss ofHCV1-3, andecological
aspects of HCV4, in all areas where land has
authorisation or commencement of activities.
The time requirements of indigenous
consultation processes may take a long while,
but this must be respected by the oil palm
companies. The consent given by the
communities mustbeinformed.Thismeansthat
communities must have access to and be
provided with comprehensive and impartial
information on the project. This includes:
� the nature and purpose of the project,
� its scale and location, duration,
reversibility, and scope,
aspects of HCV4, in all areas where land has
been cleared without prior HCV assessment
after November 2005. Further details are
available in the RSPO Remediation and
Compensation Procedures document (2015)
FPIC process
FPIC is generally understood as the right of
indigenous peoples and local communities to
giveortowithholdtheir consenttoanyproposed
actions or projects that may affect themor their
lands, livelihoods, territories or resources. The
reversibility, and scope,
� all possibleeconomic, social, cultural
and environmentalimpacts, including
potential risks and benefits, resulting
from the project, and
� that the costs and benefits of
alternative development options can
beconsideredbythecommunitywith,
or offered by, any other parties who
wish to do so, with whom the
community is free to engage.
Key to respecting consent are iterative
processes of collective consultations that are
12
lands, livelihoods, territories or resources. The
United Nations Declaration on Rights of
Indigenous People Article 32 states that
processes of collective consultations that are
transparent, demonstrate good faith in
negotiations and parties engage in mutually

respectful dialogues. The communities also
have the right to independent legal advice on
the development plans that affect them.At the
through the land development process without
going through the proper steps. Some grower
companies in Indonesia, for example, are not
the development plans that affect them.At the
end of the day, the communities have a
discretion on whether to give or withhold
consent.
In the complaint case involving a member
oftheRSPO, GoldenVeroleumLiberia (GVL)
in West Africa, complaints were raised by
several parties (See Box 2). The types of
complaints were that the RSPO member is in
violation of the NPP and the RSPO P&C; by
not providing public notification for a 30-day
period, commencing land preparation for new
planting and infrastructure development prior
companies in Indonesia, for example, are not
abletoimplement FPIC principles toits fullest
because they have to apply for different and
separatelicenses fromtherelevant government
agencies within strict stipulated timeframes
which does not allow for a full FPIC process
to take place, or causes the company to rush
the FPIC process leading to conflicts.
As of 1 December 2015, a total of
56 complaint cases have been received by the
RSPO Complaints division since 2009 (see
Figure 3). Of these, 29 cases (52%) have
been closed or closed for monitoring while aplanting and infrastructure development prior
to the expiry of the minimum 30-day
consultation period and by not conducting a
comprehensive and participatory independent
SEIA of the area concerned, land grabbing
without respecting local customary rights and
withouttheFPIC ofthecustomarylandowners
(See Box).
Non-compliance on the FPIC principles
can also occur when oil palm companies rush
been closed or closed for monitoring while a
total of 17 complaints are still outstanding
together with another 10 reported case (which
are not categorised as complaints). From the
analysis, the bulk of the cases are related to
FPIC (40%), followed by HCV related issues
(27%). About 5 per cent ofthecomplaint cases
are related directly to NPP non compliances.
An example of complaint case is as shown in
Box 2.
13
Figure 3 Complaints CASES in RSPO: distribution by category (as of
1 December 2015)
Source: http://www.rspo.org/members/complaints

Box 2: Example of Complaint Case on a member of RSPO: Golden Veroleum Liberia (GVL)
This complaint case was filed originallybyGreenAdvocates, an NGO in Liberia on 2 October 2012.
Subsequently, other complaints were filed by Forest People Programme (26 July 2013), Sustainable
Subsequently, other complaints were filed by Forest People Programme (26 July 2013), Sustainable
Development Institute Liberia(2Oct2013), KuluUnitedDevelopmentAssociation (14Nov2013). The
Forest People Programme, Green Advocates, Sustainable Development Institute, Save My Future
Foundation and Social Entrepreneurs for Sustainable Development issued a joint statement on the
GoldenVeroleum Liberia complaintson 1 Nov2013.
Themain allegation at that time was that GVLhas breached the RSPONew PlantingProcedures.
The other complaintsthen focusedon thefollowingissues: illegalityoftheconcession agreement; lack
of FPIC process; clearance of land without HCV assessment; inadequate compensation; jobs and
employment; harassment/intimidation by the company/government officials; operating in disputed
areas.
All these issues wereaffectingthe indigenous local people in thevariousdistricts in Liberia where
GVLwasoperating. Theoriginalcomplaint wasresolvedbyasking thecompanytorectifythemistakes
done on the first development in Butaw. The company then hired a consultant, The Forest Trust, to
carry out a study and make recommendations on how the initial problems can be avoided. Thecarry out a study and make recommendations on how the initial problems can be avoided. The
development in Butawarea wasmerely3 000ha in a concession area of220 000ha andas thecompany
starteddeveloping moreland,thecomplaints increased. The RSPOSecretariat isremotelylocatedfrom
Africa and had no clue as to the source or the magnitude of the problems on the ground in Liberia.
InJune 2014,withtheendorsement oftheRSPOComplaintsPanel,theRSPOSecretariatundertook
a fact finding mission tothe GVLconcession in Liberia toconsult with thecommunities affected bythe
development. Afinal report was issuedbythe RSPO Secretariat on the visit on 30September 2014, but
this report was heavily criticised by the civil society organisations and subsequentlya revised report
wasissued on 6January2015. After grapplingfor several monthswith the right actions tobe taken to
addressthisverycomplex caseandthe intertwinedissue, theRSPO ComplaintsPanel hadmade a final
decision on the GVLcomplaint in September 2015. Themember, GVLprovideda detailed responseto
theComplaints Panel decision together with therationale.
In November 2015, the Butawpeople whohad lodged theoriginal complaint have withdrawn the
complaint against GVLandarekeen forGVLtoresume operationsinthedistrict. AsofNovember2015,complaint against GVLandarekeen forGVLtoresume operationsinthedistrict. AsofNovember2015,
the Complaints Panel has decided that the “stop work order” will only be lifted after GVL has re-
negotiated the FPIC from the communities in Butaw district and signed a permanent MOU with the
community.
Source: http://www.rspo.org/members/complaints/status-of-complaints/view/24
RECENT UPDATES
Very recently in November 2015, the RSPO
updated the NPP. The latest NPP2015 (http:/
/www.rspo.org/certification/new-planting-
procedures) is effective from 1 January 2016
can be based on the earlier version or the NPP
2015. However, with effect from1 July 2016,
RSPO producer members, CBs, assessors and
other affected stake-holders are strongly
encouraged to start implementing NPP 2015.
Another new decision by the Board of
14
procedures) is effective from 1 January 2016
with a six months grace period. The grace
period means that NPPs issued to the RSPO/
CBs between 1 January 2016 and 1 July 2016
Another new decision by the Board of
Governors on sanctions for non-submission of
NPP is briefly described here. Sanction
whereby new planting areas (developed after

January 2010) that has not gone through the
NPP process will not beableto tradethecrude
palm oil and palm kernel as Certified
referredtoanddealt withtheRSPOComplaint
Procedures. In such cases, the Complaints
Panel (CP) will decide on the sanctions.
palm oil and palm kernel as Certified
Sustainable Palm Oil (CSPO) and Certified
Sustainable Palm Kernel (CSPK) for the first
three years after its certification. If these areas
arepart ofthemanagement unit beingcertified,
the mill will be registered as producing mass
balance CSPO and CSPK during the sanction
period. This sanction is effective immediately
as of 1 January 2016. This sanction is not
applicable to independent smallholder.
For the management unit which has not
gone through the NPPprocess and at the same
time did not comply with the HCVassessment
requirement, the sanction will follow
Panel (CP) will decide on the sanctions.
As of January 2016, the total number of
NPPs published on RSPO website is 134
covering11 major oilpalmproducingcountries
globally(Tables3 &4). Indonesiaisstillleading
as major expansion for oil palm is experienced
with 77 per cent of the NPP submitted.
However, Indonesia is followed by equatorial
African nations such as Liberia and Gabon in
terms of new plantings. This is seen as an
emergingtrendwhereoilpalmis nowreturning
backtoitshomelandas a sustainableplantation
crop!
requirement, the sanction will follow
procedures described in the Remediation and
Compensation Procedures (RaCP) 2015.
For themanagement unit that has not gone
through the NPP process and at the same time
did not comply to elements of the RSPO P&C
Principle 7 (i.e SEIA, FPIC, HCS), it will be
crop!
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This paper is possible with the contributions
fromthe following people listed: Datuk Darrel
Webber,Dr MartinAbraham, MsMelissa Chin
and Mr ChangAh Kow.
TABLE3
TRENDSINRSPONEWPLANTINGBYCOUNTRYFROM2010TOJANUARY2016
Country No. of NPP Sumof NPP Sumof HCVarea
published on area (ha) as in NPP (ha) as ofpublished on area (ha) as in NPP (ha) as of
RSPO website of Jan 2016 Jan 2016
as of Jan 2016
Indonesia 104 1055193 154967
Liberia 8 146955 17504
Gabon 4 90959 39586
Papua NewGuinea 7 37789 689
Cambodia 2 10719 1383
Brazil 2 7980 5442
Malaysia 2 7410 243
Nigeria 1 5594 500
Costa Rica 2 4145 -
Ghana 1 2240 119
15
Ghana 1 2240 119
Guatemala 1 691 -
Grandtotal 134 1369675 220434

TABLE4
TRENDSINRSPONPPPUBLISHEDFROM2010
TOJANUARY2016
ROUNDTABLE ON SUSTAINABLE PALM OIL
(RSPO). 2012. RSPO Manual on Best Management
Practices (BMPs) for management and rehabilitation
of natural vegetation associated with oil palm
Year No. of NPP published
on RSPO website
2010 1
2011 13
2012 18
2013 20
2014 69
2015 12
2016(as ofJan) 1
Total 134
of natural vegetation associated with oil palm
cultivation on peat, 2012.
(RSPO). 2013. RSPO Manual on Best Management
Practices (BMPs) for existing oil palm cultivation
on peat, 2013.
(RSPO) P &C. 2013. Principles and Criteria for the
Production of Sustainable Palm Oil, 2013. (RSPO
P&C)
(RSPO). 2014. RSPO GHG Assessment Procedure
for New Plantings, Dec 2014
(RSPO). 2015.RSPONew PlantingProcedure,2015.
Endorsed by the Board of Governors on 20 NovREFERENCES
KHAIRUDIN H., RASHYID R.A. and TAN C.S.I.
2015. Sustainability certification standards –
Foundation to finding the balance in people, planet
and prosperity. In: the 8th International Planters
Conference2015Book“AddressingtheTripleBottom
Line:ChangingDynamics of the OilPalm Industry”.
Kuala Lumpur:The Incorporated Societyof Planters.
61-74. (Reproduced in The Planter 91 (1071): 367-
382).
PT MUSIM MAS. 2012. http://www.musimmas.com/
cos/o.x?c=/qws/pagetree&func=view&rid=3003423
Endorsed by the Board of Governors on 20 Nov
2015.
(RSPO). 2015. RSPO Remediation and
Compensation Procedure (RaCP) related to land
clearance without prior High Conservation Value
(HCV) assessment, 2015.
WORLD WILDLIFE FUND (WWF). 2012. http://
wwf.panda.org/wwf_news/?203752/Breakthrough-
as-plantation-expansion-rule-sees-palm-oil-
company-hand-back-community-land
16

Responsible dev. ............PDF

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Responsible dev. ............PDF

Similar to Responsible dev. ............PDF (20)

Responsible dev. ............PDF