1. Consumer Assurance and sutainability of
SH citrus supply in the EU
Opening remarks
Philippe Binard
Brussels – 2 October 2012
2. Opening remarks
• Welcome and introduction of delegates
• Background to the meeting : Consumer Assurance and
sustainability of citrus SH supply into the EU
• Intitiative driven under the leadership of
– CGA
– AFINOA/FERDERCITRUS
• Meeting with a « citrus focus » but focus could be extended
to a broad fresh produce spectrum
• Sequence of the day
– Morning session on citrus sustainability ( 10h00-12h20)
– Lunch break ( 12h20- 13h00
– Afternoon session on lessons learn for QAC ( 13h0017h00 )
3. Opening remarks
• Agenda :
– Introduction remarks ( 30 min )
• Supply of SH citrus into the EU ( Philippe Binard )
• Understanding the main concerns of the retailers ( Paul Hardman )
• Questions
– Providing consumers assurance – MRL ( 60 min )
• Key challenges ( Gloria Perez )
• GAP approach ( Vaughan Hattingh )
• Residue testing approach (Vaughan Hattingh )
• Discussion
– Providing consumers assurance – Climate change /carbon
footprint/ethical trade ( 30 min)
• Perspective from Argentina ( Gloria Perez)
• Perspective from South Africa ( Paul Hardman )
• Discussion
– Closure - recommendations and waty forward
4. Introduction
• Meeting taking place on a background of
New legislation for active substances
New legislation on MRL
New legislation on sustainable use of pesticides
Proliferation of private standards
NGO protagonisms
Increase role of laboratory
Renew concerned by EU on plant health
regulation lack of compliance and its compatibility
with stricter AS/MRL legislation
5. Introduction
• but also on a background of
exposure to grey area of legislation
risk of food safety
SHAFFE position paper on engaging with
stakeholders
increase efforts of suppliers to adhere to even
stricter food safety legislation
6. Perception chemical contaminants
Consumer concerns regarding
pesticide residues on F&V
Source: Eurobarometer on
food-related risks 2010
10. Setting the scene for citrus
EU import by origin
Country 2009 2010 2011
Costa Rica 1.498.799 1.603.523 1.681.835
Ecuador 1.383.568 1.312.670 1.428.003
Colombia 1.249.950 1.213.347 1.202.715
South Africa 1.098.248 1.127.273 998.549
Morocco 885.481 833.381 852.670
Turkey 903.795 864.319 777.976
Chile 700.810 624.093 621.171
Argentina 637.060 555.365 552.723
Brazil 575.156 577.740 504.167
New Zealand 420.000 380.702 376.621 CITRUS VALUE Argentina South Africa
Other countries 3.649.256 3.860.591 3.680.630
TOTAL 13.002.122 12.953.006 12.677.058 Total citrus 181.876.522 € 344.131.224 €
out of which
Oranges 44.748.040 € 188.311.072 €
Lemons 107.914.499 € 35.314.745 €
Soft citrus 22.946.313 € 51.411.062 €
Grapefruit 6.069.964 € 67.792.943 €
11. Orange
1%
7%
10%
82%
South Africa Argentina Uruguay Chile Australia Peru
12. Lemon
0% 0%
3% 1%
28%
68%
Argentina South Africa Uruguay Chile Australia Peru
13. Grapefruit
5%
95%
Argentina Australia Chile Peru South Africa Uruguay
14. Soft Citrus
1% 0%
15%
30%
27%
27%
South Africa Argentina Peru Uruguay Chile Australia
15. All Citrus
3% 1% 0%
6%
20%
70%
South Africa Argentina Uruguay Peru Chile Australia
16. Arg Markets
1%
0% 0% 0%
3% 2%
4%
4%
31%
5%
23%
27%
Southern Europe Northern Europe Russia South East Asia
Eastern Europe UK Middle East Canada
China Other Japan USA
17. SA Markets
1%
1% 1%
3% 3%
5% 25%
8%
9%
20%
11%
13%
Northern Europe Middle East Russia South East Asia
UK Southern Europe Japan USA
Canada Other Eastern Europe China
18. EXPORTACIONES DE FRUTAS CITRICAS FRESCAS TEMPORADA 2011 EN
TONELADAS
ARGENTINA VS SOUTH AFRICA POR REGION
400000
350000
300000
250000
200000
150000
100000
50000
0
Canada China Eastern Japan Middle East Northern Other Russia South East Southern UK USA
Europe Europe (Africa) Asia Europe
FUENTE: SHAFFE 2011 SOUTH AFRICA ARG
19. SOUTH AFRICA 2011 EN TONS
1.600.000
PRODUCCION EXPORTACION
1.400.000
1.200.000
1.000.000
800.000
600.000
400.000
200.000
0
Oranges Mandarins Lemons Grapefruit
20. ARGENTINA 2011 EN TONS
1.600.000
PRODUCCION EXPORTACION
1.400.000
1.200.000
1.000.000
800.000
600.000
400.000
200.000
0
Oranges Mandarins Lemons Grapefruit
21. Understanding the main
concerns of the retailers
Paul Hardman
Industry Affairs Manager
Citrus Growers Association of Southern Africa
Brussels 2nd October 2012
Sustainability of Citrus Supply
10/11/2012 21
22. Brand Management
• Significant investment in brands
• Brands are competing – now more than ever!
• Fruit & Vegetable category leads consumers
regarding where to shop
– Loss of fruit & vegetables PLUS loss in sales of
other goods
– When fruit & vegetables department image is
damaged then BRAND image is damaged
10/11/2012 22
23. Issue Management
• Publicity on pesticide residues lead retailers to
take radical action
• Most often retailers do not have the “know-
how” to deal with the issues technically
• Therefore they react in the interest of Brand
protection, rather than an optimum solution
for the entire supply chain
• This leads to uncertainty (risk) for others in
the supply chain
10/11/2012 23
24. What has changed in the last 2 years
• Economics of sending fruit into the EU
– No buffer for mistakes
– Other markets are becoming more important
• Changes in the enforcement of EU phytosanitary
regulations
• New pests of phytosanitary significance
• Emerging evidence:
– Imazalil resistance
– Producers returning to the use of older chemistry
• Other retailers starting to follow the German retailers
regarding residue management approach
10/11/2012 24
25. What has changed in the last 2 years
• Consumer demands for “sustainability”
• Technology changes
– Residue testing techniques
• Modes of transport have changed towards
containerization
• More risk in the supply chain than before
– Ability to comply is changing
• Real solutions have been developed to come
to retailers with a suite of consumer issues
10/11/2012 25
26. Balancing brand vs GAP management
• Today we are trying to find answers to this
question of balance
• We believe the answer lies in finding a technical
solution
– This creates certainty in the supply chain
– This addresses real sustainability issues
– Elevating pesticide residues in the context of brand
management is not constructive
– No residues means no fruit
– Alignment of objectives (NGOs, retailers, importers,
exporters, growers)
10/11/2012 26
27. Consumer Assurance and Sustainability of
the Southern Hemisphere citrus supply
into the EU
Eng. Gloria C. Perez
Technical manager
Brussels, October 2nd 2012
10/11/2012 27
31. Key Challenges
• We have to ensure sustainable systems
• We define sustainability as a skill to achieve
productive and economic sustained
prosperity, protecting at the same time the
natural systems of the planet.
10/11/2012 31
32. In order to achieve sustainability, we need to consider
the role of:
• Producers/Exporters
• Importers
•Consumers
Our goal: to bring the consumer high quality fruit
and fruit safety.
10/11/2012 32
33. Producers
• They work with responsibility to achieve more
production and high quality fruit
• They use IPM, coordinating their tasks to
reach a proper sanitary management with as
little use of pesticides as possible, choosing
those with less toxicity and protecting the
environment
10/11/2012 33
34. • Exporters : They choose the best fruit and get them
ready for markets in proper shape as regards
phytosanitary conditions and food safety. These
conditions enable them to deal with long trips and
times of distribution.
• Producers + Exporters : Work together fulfilling the
demands of country of origin and the country of
destination.
• Retailers :They carry out the connection between
exporters and consumers ensuring high quality and
food safety.
35. Troubles of Producers and Exporters
• MRLs
• Reduction of quantity of active principles
• Lack of interest of enterprises to register active
• PRIVATE STANDARS
• Stakeholders demand reduction in the amount of active
substances.
• Stakeholders demand lower active substances
• Lack of inclusion of Active substances in Annex I of
91/414/EC which determines a detection limit : BANNING .
10/11/2012 35
36. MRLs should not be reduced.
WHY ??
• They are set taking into account the needs to control
pest and diseases.
• The reduction of the MRLs reduce the control over
pest and diseases bringing about of biosecurity in the
country of destination or the development of
resistance to pesticides.
• The reduction of the number of active principles
does not guarantee control.
• No more demands are necessary.
10/11/2012 36
37. Why more demands if…
• MRLs are established according to scientific standards
established by food safety.
• MRLs are sufficient guarantee that food consumed is
safe and does not harm health. So, they should be
accepted without private demands which limit them as
regards quantity or maximum number of substances.
• Their determination considers dietary habits and Safety
indicators, so, no other additional limits are necessary
(ARfD).
• It is necessary to base our work on harmonized
demands within EU.
10/11/2012 37
38. • We should not forget that :
• IT IS THE FRUIT THAT GENERATES MOVEMENT
AND TRADE
• Let us work together in harmony to be able to
address these challenges so that we can get on
with providing good quality and safe fruit to
consumers.
39. Thanks for your attention
Gloria C. Perez
gperez@afinoa.org.ar
10/11/2012 39
40. Providing Consumer Assurance
Pesticides Residues
Vaughan Hattingh
Citrus Research International
Stellenbosch University
South Africa
41. Do producers, importers & retailers have
common objectives?
Pursuit of sustainability ……√
Profitability throughout value chain ……√
Minimise environmental impact……√
Worker safety and welfare……√
Consumer welfare……√
Consumer assurance……√
42. How best to marry positions?
It is important to understand what we have to work with
Is commercial citrus production currently
feasible without reliance on PPP ……
Does that mean we stop pursuing reduced PPP
reliance……
What is then achievable and what not?
Arthropod pests (eg. Fruit flies)
Plant diseases (eg. Citrus Black Spot)
Post harvest waste (eg. Imazalil)
43. PPP are with us for the foreseeable future
How best to accommodate PPP in terms of
consumer assurance?
Understand the PPP development, usage
authorisation & MRL setting process
44. What does this development & authorisation
process look like?
Since 1970s focus on developing products with minimum
environmental impact, high specificity & minimum
mammalian toxicity (€ Billions PPP development, with
huge advances)
GAP forms the basis of usage authorisation process
MRLs are reflective of the GAP (NB ═ science based
food safety assurance, but not necessarily a safety
threshold)
45. So what does the MRL tell us?
A science-based, internationally applicable, obligatory
legal compliance, assurance of use in accordance with
GAP
Even excedence, although not legal, is not necessarily a
food safety concern
MRL compliance provides manageable and defendable
assurance
46. What are the problematic demands from
retailers?
Limiting residue levels to a proportion (50%) of the MRL
Unrealistically limiting the number of active ingredient
residues
Using the AfRD (acute reference dose) and a proportion
thereof as a residue tolerance (A most unrealistic
expectation for growers to comply with, given the
expertise one needs to access the information and apply
it, not to mention the inappropriate application)
47. Why is this so problematic? 1
In many cases compliance is a guarantee that GAP HAS NOT
been followed (≠ ASSURANCE)
Undermines IPM & drives preventative (unnecessary) use of
the older (more hazardous) broad spectrum chemistry
(≠ ASSURANCE, ≠ SUSTAINABLE)
Under-dosing drives RESISTANCE development
(≠ SUSTAINABLE)
Undermines ability to effectively manage post-
harvest waste through decay (costs, quality &
consumer perception) (≠ ASSURANCE,
≠ SUSTAINABLE)
48. Why is this so problematic? 2
Neutralises the value (environmental impact, worker safety &
reduced toxicity) of € billions PPP development & is a
disincentive to further advances (≠ ASSURANCE,
≠ SUSTAINABLE)
Introduces heightened compliance unpredictability, both
through testing variability & absence of GAP based usage
guidelines (≠ ASSURANCE)
Increased costs of testing (against a moving target) & costs
of rejection through unforeseen non-compliance
(≠ SUSTAINABLE)
49. Why is this so problematic? 3
Undermines confidence in science based legal MRLs
(≠ ASSURANCE)
Creates consumer perception that fresh produce is risky
(≠ ASSURANCE)
Jeopardises Market Access by undermining ability to meet
phytosanitary import regulations, eg. CBS
(═ inability to supply ≠ SUSTAINABLE)
50. Why is this so problematic? 4
COMPLETELY COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE TO SHARED
OBJECTIVES OF:
Profitability
Minimising environmental impact
Worker safety & welfare
Consumer confidence (assurance)
Sustainability
═ counter-productive initiative
51. How to change the tide?
Communicate through the value chain to re-direct
before major damage is done
Revert to GAP based reliable residue assurance systems
whereby:
MRLs are the compliance target
RUR ═ excellent risk management tool that can be (and
has been) incorporated into assurance schemes,
including Global GAP
IPM scoring systems?
52. What are the incentives?
Removes uncertainty & enables risk management
throughout the value chain
Enables meaningful consumer assurance
Enables role players to re-direct their focus to
pursuit of sustainability & other constructive
consumer assurance topics that can constructively
be used in Brand management
53. What are some of these other assurance
topics?
Ethical trade
Climate change
Sustainability
56. Traceability
• This methodology allows us to know
exactly the movement of our fruit from
the countryside to the destiny in EU
10/11/2012 56
57. Proper steps to ensure traceability
• Producer, Land, UPs.
• Citrus Packers / Packing Company.
REGISTRATION • Citrus Exporter.
•The information of the registration is a sworn
statment handed to and evaluated by
LAND Phytosanitary authorities
• Identity bins.
• Issue a dispatch note.
HARVEST • Take notes about your land´s
• Identify the land. progress
• Identify the
UPs.(Production Units) PACKING
• Taking notes about • Reading of Citrical
your land´s progress Transit Document
HARVOUR (DTC).
•Fill process data sheets. • Backup audit
•Identify the cases/boxes. • Phytosanitary
•Identify the pallets. EU Certificate (CF).
•Complete a form (DTC)
• The Phytosanitary Certificate
will be checked.
10/11/2012 57
58. Producer
Land
Registration 1 TCP UP s
Citrus Packers / Packing Company
Citrus Exporter
Land
Land 2 TCP
UP s
Harvest bins
Harvest 3 TCP
Traceability Dispatch note
Control 4 TCP When fresh fruit is in the packing, and also is dump.
Points
5 TCP During the process
Packing
6 TCP Above cases/boxes and pallets
7 TCP At time to make a typically ship
8 TCP Lectura de ingreso al puerto / First harvour check-in
Lectura de preembarque / Second pre-shipment
9 TCP
Harvour check-in
10
Respaldatorio
TCP
11 At the moment of cross-check The Phytosanitary
EU
TCP Certificate
59. • Phytosanitary authorities in EU allow this
system of traceability as a phytosanitary
guarantee of our fruit
• It has been audited several times and is
accepted by its credibility that guarantees
phytosanitary conditions
• We use the same scheme with the rest of the
present Certifications : Global Gap, Ethical
Trades, etc.
10/11/2012 59
60. We have also assurance certification for lemons
ALL LEMONS
• ALL LEMON – “Tested & Certified for Export” is the Argentine
seal of quality to export lemons created in 2010 as an
initiative of major companies producing, packing and
exporting Argentine lemons, especially Tucumán which is the
main producer of lemons in the world (one more example of
traceability and food safety).
• The objective of ALL LEMON is standardize and homogenize
the quality of lemons of export
10/11/2012 60
61. Thanks for your attention
Gloria C. Perez
gperez@afinoa.org.ar
10/11/2012 61
62. Alternative Consumer Assurance:
Southern African Perspective
Paul Hardman
Industry Affairs Manager
Citrus Growers Association of Southern Africa
Brussels, 2nd October 2012
64. Who is Fruit South Africa?
• Deciduous
• Citrus
• Subtropical
• Table Grapes
• Exporters
• 5000 farms; 200 000 employees
10/11/2012 64
65. Background
• 2008
– Strategic decision to be proactive - drive own ethical trade
programme
– Concerns of duplication of audits / no exchange of
information
– Tesco Ethical Trade Programme implemented
– FSA establishes ET Programme, appoints ET coordinator
• 2009
– NAMC approached regarding Multi-stakeholder forum
– Audits based on ETI Base Code and SMETA ongoing
– Between 2009 and 2011
• over 600 ethical audits
• 700 sites received training
10/11/2012 65
66. Background
• 2010
– Fruit industry workshop – endorses use of GSCP as
platform for way forward
• 2011
– October 2011 – FSA Ethical Programme launch
(SIZA)
• 2012
– August – GSCP Equivalence process completed for
Standard and Audit Process and Methodology
10/11/2012 66
67. Needs and Goals
• Internationally and nationally recognised
assurance process
• Development-led not audit-led – Continuous
improvement
• Data-system to provide accurate information
(trends, profiles); support self-regulation
• Choice of service providers
• Programme must engage with all stakeholders
• One audit recognised by all – no duplication
10/11/2012 67
68. SIZA
Sustainability Initiative of South Africa
10/11/2012 68
69. Oversight
• FSA Board to manage
• Commitment to National MSF
– CONSAWU
– Government (Department of Labour , DAFF)
– Other industries
• Global Social Compliance Initiative
– Benchmarked Code
– Benchmarked methodology
10/11/2012 69
70. Where are we now?
• September 2012 –trial audits – test audit documentation
• Data platform developed
• Capture SAQ and audit results
– provide updated information (trends/ profiles/emerging issues)
– tracks and records progress;
– important risk management tool
• Resources developed
– Ethical Trading Handbook
– Workplace Communication Toolkit
– Website: www.fruitsa-ethical.org.za
• Engagement and collaboration
– CONSAWU;
– government
– Industry Complaints’ Protocol
10/11/2012 70
71. Plans for 2012/2013
• Covert SIZA into Not-for-profit company
• Grow membership of SIZA – self-sustaining in year 3
• Self-audits and audits implemented against SIZA
Standard
• Resources to drive continuous improvement
(capacity-building)
• Data-system in place supports self-regulation
• Engagement with stakeholders (government, labour,
NGOs)
• Implement communication strategy
10/11/2012 71
73. Introduction to
Confronting Climate Change
Paul Hardman
Industry Affairs Manager
Citrus Growers Association of
Southern Africa
10/11/2012 73
74. What the project is...
Providing a platform for knowledge sharing, training and a
carbon calculator tool for the industry to measure and
catalyse a shift towards energy efficiency and sustainable
resource management.
Developed for the industry by the industry
CGA SAAPPA
10/11/2012 SASPA 74
75. What the project is...
Phase 1 initiated in 2008 to 2011
Driven by the need to better understand CC impacts at an industry & individual level
50% funded by DFID (UK development fund) & 50% industry bodies
Phase 2 runs from 2012 - 2014
80% industry bodies funding, 20% local Department of Agriculture
Main goal to improve uptake of the tool, data integrity and industry benchmark figures
The backbone of the project is:
The website information platform & the freely available online carbon calculator tool
The support of the expert team to assist the industry with technical queries
The continued feedback from the industry users which enhances the user-ability of the tool
CGA SAAPPA
10/11/2012 SASPA 75
76. The foundation of the CCC tool...
•Sound methodology – based on the PAS2050-1:2012
•Expertly reviewed
•Annually updated to maintain relevancy & alignment
with best practice
•The end goal: to have an easy-to-use but scientifically
robust tool that the industry can use to measure &
monitor progress over time
•To have accurate data to feed in to industry benchmark
analysis
10/11/2012 76
77. What makes it unique...
The ACCURATE full view of the supply chain
Packhouse Distribution/Logistics SA Port
•The ability to use ONE TOOL to get accurate results per section of the supply chain.
•Results from each section of the chain can be added together to build the full picture.
•This process encourages collaboration within the industry & supply chain
•Utilizing the existing 4 years of industry awareness, support & technical training
10/11/2012 77
78. What are the outputs...
Individual
Industry
Farm - Stonefruit
0,5
Kg Co2e per Kg fruit del. to
0,4
Packhouse
0,3
0,2
0,1
0
0 1 2 3 4
Regional benchmark results
Carbon footprint report
Showcase industry trends & highlight best
Baseline – starting point practice
Highlighting energy/carbon intensive Encourages collaboration within industry to
activities where reduction strategies will share lessons learnt & reduce where possible
have most impact
10/11/2012 78 Based on accurate & scientifically sound data
79. Lessons learnt...
•It’s all about the DATA!
•Getting the data is the hardest part –
•Level of technical support required is vital for success
•Data quality and availability dictates inclusions of the
assessment (for example soil carbon & sequestration is
currently excluded due to lack of accurate data)
•Data quality control necessary for industry benchmark
analysis results to be representative & meaningful.
•User-friendliness – incorporate feedback to enhance
mechanics & user interface (make the tool do all the
hard work – user provides activity data)
10/11/2012 79
80. What’s the next step...
•A call for collaboration with retailers
•Use an existing and well supported system to
feed in to your systems
10/11/2012 80
81. THANK YOU forout more:
Find your time....
We value your time & input and look forward to working together
with you on this journey.
Contact details: Presenters details:
Shelly Fuller (project manager)
shelly@climatefruitandwine.co.za
www.climatefruitandwine.co.za
10/11/2012 81
83. Key outcomes of this discussion
• The South African and Argentina citrus
industries, with partners along the supply
chain, are seeking to make the southern
hemisphere supply chain more sustainable by:
– Reducing risk along the supply chain for all parties
– Adopting “true” sustainability
– Promoting Good Agricultural Practice
– Promoting traceability, high levels of worker
welfare and protection of the environment.
10/11/2012 83
