|
Project Update
June 3, 2009
The Stewardship Index continues to make progress in developing specific metrics and expanding project participation among industry leaders, NGOs, scientists and others. Highlights include: - Hosted seven webinars since April 1 to advance metrics discussions relating to energy, GHG emissions, pesticides, water use, and water quality. In addition, metrics facilitators have continued to solicit input through interviews and smaller group discussions.
- Expanded participation in the Metrics Review Committee to approximately 240 participants, including industry leaders, NGOs, scientists and government agencies.
- Received offers from over a dozen participating businesses and trade associations to help pilot draft Stewardship Index metrics in actual supply chains. Please let us know if you are interested in helping with this effort.
- Scheduled an in-person meeting of the Coordinating Council in mid-July to review work completed to date.
Draft metric solutions under discussion On the following pages please find a summary of the metric solutions being considered by each workgroup. Note these metrics may be revised significantly before being formally proposed to the Coordinating Council. More information about these discussions can be found on the Metrics Review Committee's workspace at www.stewardshipindex.org. Summary of Draft Metric Solutions Currently Being Considered This document is intended to provide a sense of the metric solutions now being considered in each metric workgroup. The metrics described below may be revised significantly before being proposed to the Stewardship Index's Coordinating Council. More information about these discussions can be found on the Metrics Review Committee's workspace at www.stewardshipindex.org. WORKGROUP | AREA /Facilitator(s) | FARM | NON-FARM (distribution, processing, retail/food service) | Human Resources
(worker health & safety, employment practices, etc.) | Karen Ross, Calif. Assoc. of Winegrape Growers
Ron Strochlic, California Institute for Rural Studies | Same | Considering multiple metrics and/or scored practices in the areas of: compliance with local and international labor laws and conventions; wages: benefits; occupational health and safety; human resource policies and procedures, retention and job satisfaction. | Same | Community
(local sourcing / hiring, etc.) | Not started | Not started | Air Quality | Andrew Arnold, SureHarvest | Miriam Rotkin-Ellman and Lucia Somberg, NRDC | NOx and PM2.5 emissions per yield. Sources include mobile and stationary engine combustion using emission factors from US EPA. VOC emissions from pesticide applications would be included in the pesticide risk model proposed below (relying on California Dept of Pesticide Regulation data). | NOx, PM2.5 and Hazardous Air Pollutant emissions per unit of production. Sources include mobile and stationary engine combustion. | Biodiversity & Ecosystems | Frank Casey and Sara O'Brien, Defenders of Wildlife | N/A | Sum of each area on the management site or under ownership multiplied by a habitat score for that area. This number would then be divided by the total area under management/ownership. | Energy Use | Cynthia Cory, California Farm Bureau Federation
Daniella Malin, Sustainable Food Lab | Miriam Rotkin-Ellman, NRDC | Pending results of model review, as described below. | Total annual energy use converted to BTUs per unit of production. Includes on-site stationary and mobile energy use ("Scope 1") and purchases of off-site electricity, steam, etc. ("Scope 2"). | GHG Emissions | Cynthia Cory, California Farm Bureau Federation
Daniella Malin, Sustainable Food Lab | Miriam Rotkin-Ellman, NRDC | Considering several possible models to estimate GHG emissions at the farm level including Daycent (USDA), DNDC (Applied Geosolutions) and tools developed by Unilever, Carbon Trust and the Keystone Field to Market initiative. | Total annual GHG emissions in CO2 equivalents per unit of production. Includes CO2, CH4, N2O, HFC, and PFCs released on-site ("Scope 1") from stationary and mobile combustion, on-site waste disposal, and refrigeration and from off-site energy generation ("Scope 2"). Recognized calculation methods include Mandatory Reporting Requirements under the CA Global Warming Solutions Act (AB32), USEPA Proposed GHG Reporting Rule, Climate Registry: General Reporting Protocol or WBCD/WRI Greenhouse Gas Reporting Protocol. | Nutrients | Jeff Dlott and Dan Sonke, SureHarvest | N/A | Pounds of nitrogen applied per yield;
Pounds of phosphorus applied per yield | Packaging | Not Started | Not Started | Pesticides | Steve Balling, Del Monte
Jonathan Kaplan, NRDC | TBD | Risk score using IPM Options Evaluation Tool. See www.ipminstitute.org/pmoet | Not Started | Soils | Jeff Dlott and Dan Sonke, SureHarvest | N/A | Soil loss: Consider Rusle2 model developed by USDA.
Soil organic matter: Measured SOM as a percentage of site specific SOM potential | Waste | Lucia Somberg, NRDC | Same | Loss: Percentage of the product not used for the original intended use.
Total amount of waste: Total amount of waste per unit of product.
Disposal score: Weighting coefficients for each of the following disposal types: other food use; anaerobic digestion; cogeneration; composting, plow-in/crop residue; recycling; animal feed; landfill; incineration; hazardous waste. | Same | Water Quality | Jeff Dlott and Dan Sonke, SureHarvest | Lucia Somberg, NRDC | | Waste water: Consideration being given to measuring mass of solids sent to POTW or applied to land.
Stormwater: Measure percentage of facility/site that is either a permeable surface or drains to holding pond. | Water Use | Tim Frank, American Farm Land Trust
Hank Giclas, Western Growers | Lucia Somberg, NRDC | Volume of water applied per yield | Volume of water used per unit of production | Green Procurement | Not Started | Not Started | Fair Price | Not Started | Not Started |
|
