There was strong agreement among meeting attendees that the Stewardship Index has built substantial credibility as a definitive metric development body. Another shared sentiment was that we must seize the opportunity now to move SISC metrics from theoretical to practical application in a way that will support the fruit, vegetable and nut industry in identifying increased efficiencies.

The Council, which makes all decisions by consensus, was successful in making a number of important decisions over the two days. The group agreed to:

- a number of strategic pilot objectives and ways we will work together over the next few months to meet and exceed pilot goals;

- next steps for the green house gas, human resource, pesticide and waste metrics;

- an institutional framework concept that we will build out into a strategic plan; 

- explore ways in which harmonization and collaboration with other agriculture metrics efforts can leverage important SISC accomplishments.

Full meeting minutes will be available in the next few days.

We've long heard from environmental and animal rights groups. Now, the voices of celebrity chefs, authors and filmmakers are becoming much more prominent. Even hospitals, public health and medical groups are weighing in to encourage changes in the food system, with a focus on sustainability—for which there is no accepted definition.

Buyers of the products we grow—food companies, retailers and foodservice chains—are focusing on agricultural practices in the name of healthier consumers, healthier animals and a healthier planet.

Our methods and motives are being questioned and challenged as never before.

California farmers and ranchers are at a critical crossroads. How do we strategically respond to make the greatest impact on shaping this conversation without being too defensive? How do we capitalize on the mushrooming public curiosity about who grows their food and how it's grown?

Buyers are at the top of the list of stakeholders trying to tap into this phenomenon. More buyers are making site visits and wanting to know more about our practices. This is an educational opportunity to influence our buyers and they in turn can help disarm some of our critics. While we can't have people telling us how to farm, we can be aware of their concerns and help them appreciate all the best management practices already in place, what change is possible, what's not and where we will do things differently.

The 2011 Food Foresight trends report cites Joe MacIlvaine of Paramount Farming on buyer concerns: "We clearly aren't doing everything we can to address their concerns but we're 90 percent there, so why not document and package our practices? Doing so allows us to frame the discussion and get ahead of it." MacIlvaine pointed to an initiative the Almond Board of California is working on. The board is helping define "sustainability" by breaking it down into modules. More than 300 growers are participating in a program to quantify air and water quality, pesticides, fertilizer, even human resources practices. The Almond Board has a goal to double the number of participants in 2012.

"Customers aren't going away on this," MacIlvaine said. "The question is, do we want a separate set of standards for every customer or one set for the industry? The Almond Board (like the California winegrape growers before it), is working toward the latter."

Western Growers and the California Farm Bureau Federation are providing input to a similar initiative called the Stewardship Index for Specialty Crops. Farm, buyer and environmental groups are working together on identifying and testing science-based metrics that make economic sense for measuring resource use efficiency. The Stewardship Index is also involved with other like-minded initiatives, including the Field-to-Market Initiative and the Sustainability Consortium, to harmonize objective sustainability metrics, but are years away from agreement on which metrics are appropriate, feasible and quantifiable.

Parallel to developing these metrics, there are multiple stakeholder initiatives around the country—30 at last count—dealing with a number of variations of feeding an increasingly hungry world while using fewer natural resources. Foundations are funding many of these initiatives. Most of the initiatives lack adequate producer involvement. Without it, we are likely to suffer the consequences of unrealistic regulations and production protocols being imposed upon agriculture by others.

Given the unprecedented involvement, both in number and type of non-farm stakeholders, we have to be engaged. However, we also need to be strategic about picking those groups and initiatives with which to align ourselves.

Most of these initiatives are responses to the agendas of others. We should also take the offensive and frame our own opportunities. The diversity of California agricultural production, both geographically and in crops grown, fits nicely with strategies to address alarming public health trends of increasing obesity, the prevalence of diabetes, escalating health care costs, and concerns relative to a growing number of people who don't have access to enough healthy food.

Why not engage retail and foodservice chains with health and medical groups and food banks on public health initiatives, in return for public and policy support for issues critical to growing healthy foods?

Agriculture must begin to work cooperatively in these efforts. There's too much demonizing of some agricultural segments by others: "My way of farming is better than yours." "Small is beautiful, big is bad." "Big is more efficient, small is for the elite." The list of ways we divide ourselves is increasing. Demonizing each other neither adds to agriculture's strength at the stakeholder-planning table nor hastens the development of effective solutions to important issues affecting the economic viability of our producers. It's all about choices. Consumers want a variety of food choices and entrepreneurial farmers can meet those demands with a variety of business models. There's room for everyone.

The reality is the world needs more food production utilizing the most efficient, sustainable and effective production technologies to meet the demands of a growing population. Agriculture must work together or face a host of unintended consequences.

(Tom Nassif is CEO of Western Growers. Paul Wenger is president of the California Farm Bureau Federation.)

Permission for use is granted, however, credit must be made to the California Farm Bureau Federation when reprinting this item.

“We take stewardship to mean responsible planning and management of resources,” said Jessica Siegal, program director for the Stewardship Index for Specialty Crops. “The responsible management of resources is a key element of sustainability.”

The Stewardship Index is a project managed by Ag Innovations Network, Sebastopol, Calif., to encourage a focus on responsible resource management and to create a widely accepted set of measurements that can be used by growers to gauge resource usage, Siegal said.

“You can only manage what you can measure,” Siegal said. “We’re offering a simple, free and functional tool developed by the industry, for the industry.”

The index is recruiting a diverse group of growers to pilot the 2011 Stewardship Index for Specialty Crops Metrics.

Siegal said she hopes large and small growers, conventional and organic growers, and growers of a variety of specialty crops will participate.

The four key environmental indicators in the latest version are soil health and the use of nutrients, energy and water. Those were pared down from 18 metrics on the version piloted in 2010, Siegal said.

“We hope the stewardship metrics will help growers see what can be measured, and it’ll leave it up to them to decide how to manage resources,” she said.

For those who already have stewardship plans in place, the tool can provide a way to communicate to supply chain partners about their practices, she said.

“The end game for the entire industry is a single set of metrics so that both those on the producer end and those on the buyer end will speak the same language,” Siegal said.

The scenario Siegal hopes to avoid is one where every buyer defines and measures sustainability in its own way and requires growers to meet its standards to enter contract negotiations.

01/19/2012 5:19:11 PM

Agricultural producers and retailers alike are looking for ways to communicate the “good food” story and support that story with data on sustainability practices. In this session, we will learn about the Stewardship Index for Specialty crops, an emerging system for measuring, benchmarking and communicating stewardship performance data throughout the supply chain. A grower who has piloted these on-farm metrics will discuss the value proposition of comparing stewardship data year-over-year. We will also seek grower feedback about the concept of sustainability metric reporting and request your involvement in the 2012 metric pilot.

Presenters: Jessica Siegal, Stewardship Index for Specialty Crops, Sebastopol, CA; Dana Gunders, Natural Resources Defense Council, San Francisco, CA; Larry Jacobs, Jacobs Farm / Del Cabo, Pescadero, CA.

As the oldest and largest ecological agricultural gathering in the West, the EcoFarm Conference meets every year to create, maintain, and promote healthy, safe, and just food farming systems. With over 1,500 attendees, the three days yield myriad opportunities for networking with colleagues, discovering the newest ecological agricultural development and techniques, and building skills for us as individuals and together as a community.

This year we are Raising EcoFarmers' Voices with over 60 workshops featuring a comprehensive array of technical sessions for farmers, ranchers, handlers, marketers, activists, students, and educators. With our generous food donors and delicious menu created by Angela Karegeannes of A Fork Full of Earth Organic Catering, meals in Crocker Hall are delicious and satisfying. Evening events include tastings, mixers, live entertainment, and more. And our annual EcoFarm Awards Ceremony on Friday evening celebrates giants in the sustainable agriculture community, always an inspiring event of the conference.

01/04/2012 

by Tom Karst

The Stewardship Index for Specialty Crops aims to conduct expanded pilot projects with up to 150 specialty crop growers in the 2011-12 crop year to measure to energy use, water use, nutrient use and soil health.

“Those were the four metrics that were deemed the most valuable and also those for which growers had the most ready access to the data that we’re asking for,” said Jessica Siegal, program director for the California-based Stewardship Index for Specialty Crops.

Siegal said the group has developed a metric calculator, an Excel spreadsheet with a detailed user guide to help growers through the data submission process.

She said the goal for the pilot projects in 2012 is to engage 150 growers to measure metrics. More than 550 stakeholders are involved in dialogue about the metrics, she said. In 2010, about 100 growers expressed interest in the metrics. Forty of those growers submitted 55 data sets.

The long-term goal is to continue to expand participation, consensus and buy-in around the stewardship index concept across the entire specialty crops supply chain, Siegal said.

“We are definitely scaling up the level of outreach and engagement in 2012,” she said.

Siegal said there has been excitement among growers about the utility of the metrics calculator.

“Folks will see energy use both by yield and by acreage, and the same thing for water use, nutrient use,” she said.

Siegal said participating growers will also see a measure of their soil organic potential based on the region where they grow crops.

Compared with the first year of the pilots in 2010, she said the biggest improvements in the pilot process in 2011-12 is the creation of the metric calculator and the reduction of the number of metrics that are being evaluated.

“The calculator is a very user-friendly and hands-on tool, compared with just a pdf document that we were sharing with folks last year,” she said.

Hank Giclas, Irvine, Calif.-based Western Growers senior vice president for science, technology and strategic planning, said the metrics calculator should make it easier for producers to track their inputs.

Siegal said there are other metrics in various stages of development with the effort, including measures for greenhouse gases, biodiversity, human resources and packaging.

“We will continue to work on developing those metrics and hopefully toward the end of 2012 and early 2013, those metrics that the group is identifying as high priority for the industry will be added to the suite of metrics that we are offering,” she said.

Metrics on pesticide also are on the back burner for now, she said. “In 2010 we piloted a draft pesticide metric, but the group decided that risk wasn’t the proper focus to look at the issue, so it is a very important part of what the Stewardship Index will do, but at this point we’re just focusing on the four core metrics,” she said.

The Stewardship Index for Specialty Crop Index received a Conservation Innovation grant from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Natural Resources Conservation Service, which will cover the costs of much of the group’s activities through 2013. At this point, there are no membership fees connected with the effort.

Siegal said there are other initiatives looking at metrics for sustainable agriculture, but the Stewardship Index is the only one focused on specialty crops.

“We collaborate very closely with a number of them with a goal of identifying synergies and mutual strengthening of what we offer,” she said.

The Stewardship Index metrics have promise to help growers efficiently manage input use, said Kathy Means, Newark, Del.-based Produce Marketing Association vice president of government relations and public affairs,

“People are finding operational efficiencies and that contributes directly to the bottom line,” Means said. In addition, buyer and customer interest in sustainability measures is increasing, she said.

http://vimeo.com/34520505

Minute 1-14: Background on Stewardship Index for Specialty Crops and overview of Metric Calculator

Minute 15-45: Demo of Excel-based Metric Calculator

Minute 46-60: Overview of pilot process; question and answer.

We encourage all fruit, vegetable and nut producers who are curious about the Stewardship Index to watch the video and participate in our 2011/2012 pilot. 

Please contact Jessica Siegal with questions and inquiries: jessica@stewardshipindex.org or 707 331 1810

While hundreds of SISC stakeholders have participated in developing these metrics, there is no substitute for first-hand, on-the-ground experience.  Learning from on-farm pilots in 2010 proved invaluable, and resulted in significant changes to the draft metrics.  By forging consensus among leading growers, buyers, and public interest organizations, SISC is poised to define the industry approach and reduce the potential for a proliferation of similar-but-different sustainability reporting systems. 

For details, visit: http://www.stewardshipindex.org/pilot_materials.php

Furthermore, all of the existing sustainability certification programs (such as Lodi Rules for Sustainable Winegrowing, Sustainability in Practice, Certified California Sustainable Winegrowing Program, National Organic Program and Biodynamic Farming) are practice-based. University and government programs designed to improve environmental and social conditions on and off the farm also are based on implementing what have been labeled best management practices, or BMPs.

In all cases, the underlying assumption is that the practices being recommended and implemented are improving one’s sustainability performance. Once practices are implemented, however, very little if any follow up measurements are made to find out if, in fact, these practices are having the benefits attributed to them.

During the past few years, sustainability proponents have shown increasing interest in measuring the outcomes of practices as a more direct way to gauge sustainability performance. Measurements used to quantify this performance are called performance metrics. Winegrape growers already use some performance metrics, such as yield per acre and cost of production per acre. Wineries track cases of wine produced, the cost of production per case and numbers of cases sold. However, while these are important, there are many others that could be used as well.

A change in approach

Measuring performance rather than tracking practices is a change in approach to determining levels of sustainability. For example, if we implement practices to improve water-use efficiency, then we should measure water use over time in relation to yield and quality to see if our practices are, in fact, improving water-use efficiency.

The logic in this approach is if we are implementing practices to achieve a desired outcome, then why not measure the outcome directly to gauge success? In this example, water use per unit of production is the performance metric. Other performance metrics are energy use per unit of production, nutrient inputs per unit of production and measures of biodiversity, greenhouse gas production and water and air quality. It is relatively easy to develop metrics and measure outcomes for things such as water use. Metrics to measure the outcomes of practices in other areas, such as human resources and ecosystem management, are much more challenging to develop and measure.

At this point in time, the groups showing the most interest in having growers start using performance metrics in their farming operations are buyers in the supply chain. While this may not be the case for wine, it is certainly true for many food crops. Buyers such as Wal-Mart, Unilever, Sysco and PepsiCo are encouraging their suppliers to use at least some performance metrics to measure their sustainability. This kind of pressure is causing consternation for some growers. Their concern is that collecting the necessary data required by the metric will increase their farming costs, yet their buyer will not pay them any more for their crops. In other words they are concerned using performance metrics will become a market-access issue rather than adding value to what they grow.

Some in the wine community have concluded that performance metrics are not something to be concerned about because wine buyers in the supply chain are not influenced by the same things as buyers of produce and other food crops. While this might be true at the moment, the growing concern and media conversation about topics such as climate change, greenhouse gas production and water quality will likely result in wine and winegrape buyers being concerned about performance metrics. Some wineries already are marketing their vineyards and wineries as carbon neutral, indicating a move in this direction.

Incentives for growers?

Why should winegrape growers and winemakers be interested in learning about and using performance metrics in their operations? Hopefully there will be more incentives than just ensuring market access. It is very likely that using performance metrics such as water use, energy use and nutrient inputs over time will identify areas within the vineyard or wineries where more efficient processes and practices can be implemented.

By measuring and tracking outcomes, it will become evident which practices are resulting in desired outcomes and which are not. Those not having an effect can be discontinued. However, just as there is a lack of economic data to show the benefit of many of the sustainable practices growers implement, there is also a lack of economic data showing the benefits of using performance metrics—in part because the concept is quite new for agriculture.

The manufacturing industry has been using performance metrics for quite a while and has completed many case studies of how tracking things like fuel consumption in the trucking of products or energy consumption with a manufacturing process has led to redesigning processes and implementing practices that resulted in significant savings.

Other potential benefits of using performance metrics are to provide buyers with data that meets the ever-increasing need for transparency of information about how the crop is produced. We have already heard a great deal about the carbon footprint of a vineyard or winery; it will not be long before people want to know about the water footprint and energy footprint, too. If data from performance metrics can be aggregated for a region or state, it can convey the collective dedication to achieving measurable sustainable outcomes to regulators, the media and consumers.

The California Sustainable Winegrowing Alliance (CSWA) was formed in 2002 to encourage sustainable practices in the vineyard and winery. Through its Sustainable Winegrowing Program (SWP), CSWA has had amazing participation from the California wine community. To date, a total of 1 ,680 distinct winery and vineyard organizations representing more than 65% of California’s wine case production and nearly 70% of the winegrape acreage have used CSWA’s Code of Sustainable Winegrowing Practices self-assessment workbook to evaluate the sustainability of their operations. (Dr. Joe Browde, SureHarvest, provided the information on CSWA’s SWP program.)

CSWA’s program has, until now, been focused on implementing practices. However, it is embracing the next step in sustainable winegrowing, which is incorporating some performance metrics into its grower outreach and education program.

Metrics for California

With financial support from the Natural Resource Conservation Service’s Conservation Innovation Grant program, CSWA has initiated a project to adapt an initial set of environmental performance metrics for the California wine industry to support individual and industry-wide performance tracking, goal setting and continuous improvement. The metrics are being chosen from those developed by the Stewardship Index for Specialty Crops (SISC), a multi-stakeholder project with the goal of developing a common set of performance metrics for use throughout the specialty crop supply chain. I described the SISC program in my May 2009 Vineyard View column, “Introducing the Stewardship Index.”

CSWA’s sustainable winegrowing program joint committee is recommending the initial set of metrics based on criteria that include economic and environmental impact, data availability from winegrowers and winemakers, ease of use and the state of the science on which the metrics are based. These metrics are: energy, water, greenhouse gas production and nitrogen applied. The SWP joint committee is a group of more than 50 growers and vintners from organizations throughout California.

The project will create an online performance metrics sustainability portal that growers and winemakers can use to calculate metrics for their operations and access educational information that will help in using the metrics. The metric results will be transferred confidentially to the SWP online system for storage and reporting, similar to how the self assessment of sustainability practices for vineyards and wineries has been handled in SWP’s self-assessment workbook program.

The goal of CSWA’s performance metrics project is to incorporate the metrics into the SWP’s free online system where growers and winemakers can confidentially store data, track improvements over time and access tools and resources to help minimize operational costs and benchmark their performance relative to their peers.

Later this year CSWA will be convening workshops throughout California to pilot test the metrics and the online system with winegrowers and winemakers. I encourage California winegrowers and winemakers to attend one to learn about and pilot test the metrics chosen by CSWA and begin to understand the future direction of sustainable winegrowing.

For those of you outside California, you can participate in the SISC pilot test project, which is available to any winegrape grower or winery in the United States. For more information about SISC, visit stewardshipindex.org.

A word of caution

It is important as we move into this new era of measuring sustainability performance that we do not forget about the variability in biological systems. The calculation of one performance metric for a season is one number, but it is important to remember that the calculation from this metric will vary in space and time. Performance metrics vary due to differences from one growing season to the next, from one region to another, from one crop to another and so forth.

The danger I see is that people will focus on a single number from a metric calculation rather than analyze the much more complex variability of numbers over space and time. However, understanding what is causing the variation will be the most valuable information in improving sustainability performance. At this time, because of the variability likely to occur from one region to another, I think performance metrics will be most valuable for a winegrower or winemaker to use within their operations, tracking them over time and making adjustments in practices based on the outcomes.

Dr. Cliff Ohmart is vice president of professional services for SureHarvest and author of “View from the Vineyard: A practical guide to sustainable winegrape growing,” due to be published this month by Wine Appreciation Guild. Previously he served as research/IPM director at the Lodi-Woodbridge Winegrape Commission. He has been writing about sustainable winegrowing issues for Wines & Vines since 1998.

Read more at: http://www.winesandvines.com/template.cfm?section=columns_article&content=91451&columns_id=41#
Copyright © Wines & Vines

"We're announcing more than 52 grants today—these are 52 opportunities to help some of America's top agricultural and conservation institutions, foundations and businesses develop unique approaches to enhancing and protecting natural resources on agricultural lands," said Vilsack. "The grants will help to spur creativity and problem solving to benefit conservation-minded farmers and ranchers. Everyone who relies upon the sustainability of our nation's natural resources for clean water, food and fiber, or their way of life, will benefit from these grants."

“Conservation Innovation Grants allow our partners to demonstrate innovative approaches to address some of the nation’s most compelling natural resource concerns such as soil erosion, water and air quality, and energy.”

Projects will be carried out in 40 states. Eight of the approved grants support development of conservation innovations in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed, and another eight focus on the Mississippi River Basin. Grant winners pay 50 percent of project costs.

Summary:

Stewardship Index for Specialty Crops- $761,820 for grant period from October 2011- September 2013

The Stewardship Index for Specialty Crops (SISC) is a multi-stakeholder initiative to develop a system for measuring sustainable performance throughout the specialty crop supply chain. Renewal funding is requested to continue an unprecedented collaboration amongst the nation’s most influential grower organizations, NGOs and buyers of specialty crop products. The project is making progress toward providing a suite of outcomes-based metrics to enable operators at any point along the supply chain to benchmark, compare, and communicate their own performance in meeting sustainability goals.

Project objectives: Expand and complete metrics pilot testing. Develop, refine and manage metric portfolio. Governance, outreach and tool development.

For a summary of all proposals selected for a 2011 Conservation Innovation Grant, click on this link or copy and paste into your browser:

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/?ss=16&navtype=SUBNAVIGATION&cid=stelprdb1044889&navid=100120290000000&pnavid=100000000000000&position=Not%20Yet%20Determined.Html&ttype=detail&pname=Conservation%20Innovation%20Grants%20-%20Awardees:%20%20Fiscal%20Year%202011%20|%20NRCS

Ag Alert Magazine,  California Farm Bureau Federation

August 17, 2011

By Christine Souza

While farmers will tell you that they’ve been sustainable for generations, they face increased demands to demonstrate sustainability as customers express interest in where their food originates and how it is grown. To measure sustainability, a group of about 30 representatives from the nation’s agricultural, food production and nonprofit sectors formed the Stewardship Index for Specialty Crops, a voluntary, pilot program to develop metrics to benchmark, compare and communicate performance.

Noelle Cremers, California Farm Bureau Federation natural resources and commodities director, said the Stewardship Index for Specialty Crops has received mixed reviews, but signifies an effort to create a workable program for farmers.

“The Stewardship Index is not a standard, so no one is required to meet anything; it is just a way to measure your operation. There may ultimately be a standard that retailers impose, but at least it will have been done in a way that is thoughtful, that works for farmers, and farmers are able to participate in its development,” Cremers said.

Jessica Siegal, program director for the Stewardship Index for Specialty Crops, said the goal is to develop a set of performance metrics that will work for the entire fruit and vegetable sector.

“The work that we’re doing will be one set of metrics, one system that all the actors can turn to collectively because it will have been developed collectively,” Siegal said. “There is a wide scope in terms of opinion: Some people are really enthusiastic and others are a little bit more hesitant.”

Bob Martin, general manager of King City-based Rio Farms, maintains an interest in the process to develop metrics and said he realizes that there will be more pressure placed on farmers to comply with sustainability-related guidelines.

“The urgency is not as crucial as the food safety metrics were, but eventually we’re all going to be filling out forms,” Martin said. “Because it is such a consolidated marketplace, there are only so many people to sell to. If you say no to one buyer regarding sustainability, you are probably going to lose 20 to 30 percent of your business. You can’t afford to do that.”

Performance metrics currently being examined cover energy use, water use, soil health and nutrient use.

“We’ve taken those four metrics and built them into an Excel calculator. The grower receives this Excel document and they can look back at their records and pull information from their bills and all different types of records,” Siegal said.

The calculator offers immediate and specified results about a grower’s operation that he or she may not have had before. For the long term, the grower information, which is strictly confidential, is submitted to the Stewardship Index for Specialty Crops Coordinating Council, a governing board of about 30 representatives. The council will review all of the information and make decisions about what the information means and how it should be used.

Hank Giclas, Western Growers senior vice president and a member of the council, said a key goal is to measure what matters to producers and minimize the proliferation of sustainability specifications from buyers.

“This is a voluntary effort intended primarily to give producers a methodology to benchmark their current efforts, compare those efforts with others, and allow them to choose methods that work for their operation to make the improvements they deem important or prudent,” Giclas said.

Molly Watkins, a member of the California Roundtable on Agriculture and the Environment in her role as president of the San Joaquin County Resource Conservation District, compares the Sustainability Index for Specialty Crops to the Lodi Rules for Sustainable Winegrowing program started by grape growers in San Joaquin County.

“With Lodi Rules, they got all of the growers to participate and share production information and then they learned from each other. That’s what this Stewardship Index is trying to duplicate,” Watkins said. “Through Lodi Rules, growers have been able to reduce their pesticide use and share production information that has made their bottom line better. If it only takes you 20 minutes, it might be a good thing.”

Martin said he believes farmers will see little direct financial benefit from taking part in this type of sustainability process.

“We’re not going to get more money for our crop; we’re just going to be able to compete with everybody else,” Martin said. “Eventually, if producers want to sell their product, they are going to have to join the gang and be part of the solution.”

The Sustainability Index for Specialty Crops is looking for growers to pilot test metrics on fruit and vegetable operations of all scales, with a focus on citrus, potatoes, strawberries, processing tomatoes, winegrapes and romaine lettuce. For more information, contact Siegal at jessica@stewardshipindex.org or 707-331-1810.

(Christine Souza is an assistant editor of Ag Alert. She may be contacted at csouza@cfbf.com.)

Beta Metrics Version 1.0 Calculator and User Guide

When the Coordinating Council (CC) met in April, we heard a summary of pilot participant feedback including a request for a shorter and easier to use set of metrics. As a result, the CC approved the following metrics as Beta Metrics Version 1.0: energy use, water use, soil quality and nutrient efficiency. The group also requested that we develop an allocation methodology for reporting energy use at the crop level. Since April, we have been developing an excel calculator for using the metrics, a methodology for allocating total farm energy use to specific crops, and a calculator to help growers estimate crop evapo-transpiration  (ETc).

During the July meeting, the CC reviewed and approved the Beta Metric Calculator. The group believes that it is directionally correct and will make the next phase of pilots more productive. The added benefit of the SISC calculator will be the ability, over time, to collect sector-level data that isn’t included in the USDA Agriculture Census, and to identify opportunities for increased efficiencies. Steps prior to piloting include: grower trials to get initial feedback on usability of the calculator and the review of a methodology document by the appropriate metric review committees.

Data Confidentiality Policy

The CC reviewed and approved an explicit, concise data confidentiality policy based on feedback from 2010 pilot participants. The goal of the policy is to preserve the confidentiality of the data that is contributed by volunteer pilot participants, while enabling the sharing of anonymized data and lessons learned within the SISC community. The policy establishes a clear, reasonable and fair standard for confidentiality applicable to all parties involved with the SISC pilot program. The main difference in the 2011 policy is that it doesn’t require going back to pilot participants for confirmation that data are effectively anonymous, but rather leaves that activity in the hands of the CC. The group agreed that the next round of pilot data will be useful for perfecting the calculator and testing the capacity for peer-to-peer learning, which is at the heart of the SISC concept.

Fiscal Sponsorship

The CC unanimously approved a proposal that SISC becoming a fiscally sponsored program of Ag Innovations Network.  The fiscal sponsorship agreement will enable SISC to fundraise as its own entity rather than as individual stakeholder entities and establish the CC as the formal secretariat of SISC. In exchange for an administrative fee of 8% of SISC funds raised, Ag Innovations Network will provide SISC with bookkeeping and financial reporting services, contracting authority, and liability insurance.  This proposal is still pending approval by the Ag Innovations Network Board which will take place in late August or early September.

Click here to read the full article or to listen to a podcast summary: http://www.wired.com/magazine/2011/06/ff_feedbackloop/all/1

City engineers in Garden Grove, CA, took a new approach to reducing speeding in school zones: they put up dynamic speed displays, or driver feedback signs- a speed limit posting coupled with a radar sensor attached to a huge digital readout announcing “Your Speed.”

The results fascinated city officials. In the vicinity of the schools, drivers slowed an average of 14 percent. At three schools the average speed dipped below the posted speed limit. Indeed, traffic engineers and safety experts consider feedback signs to be more effective at changing driving habits than a cop with a radar gun. Despite their redundancy, despite their lack of repercussions, the signs have accomplished what seemed impossible: They get us to let up on the gas.

The signs leverage what’s called a feedback loop, a profoundly effective tool for changing behavior. Action, information, reaction. But the simplicity of feedback loops is deceptive. They are in fact powerful tools that can help people change damaging patterns, even those that seem intractable. Just as important, they can be used to encourage beneficial patterns, turning progress itself into a reward. In other words, feedback loops change human behavior. And thanks to an explosion of new technology, the opportunity to put them into action in nearly every part of our lives is quickly becoming a reality.

A feedback loop involves four distinct stages. First comes the data: A behavior must be measured, captured, and stored. This is the evidence stage. Second, the information must be relayed to the individual, not in the raw-data form in which it was captured but in a context that makes it emotionally resonant. This is the relevance stage. But even compelling information is useless if we don’t know what to make of it, so we need a third stage: consequence. The information must illuminate one or more paths ahead. And finally, the fourth stage: action. There must be a clear moment when the individual can recalibrate a behavior, make a choice, and act. Then that action is measured, and the feedback loop can run once more, every action stimulating new behaviors that inch us closer to our goals.

Advances in sensor technology are making feedback loops more powerful and accessible than ever. Of course, sensor technology has been tracking what people do for years. The nation’s tractor-trailer fleets have long been equipped with GPS and other location sensors so that companies can track their cargo and the drivers. But the true power of feedback loops is not to control people but to give them control. It’s like the difference between a speed trap and a speed feedback sign—one is a game of gotcha, the other is a gentle reminder of the rules of the road. The ideal feedback loop gives us an emotional connection to a rational goal.

And today, their promise couldn’t be greater. The intransigence of human behavior has emerged as the root of most of the world’s biggest challenges. Consider our problems with carbon emissions, where managing personal energy consumption could be the difference between a climate under control and one beyond help. And feedback loops aren’t just about solving problems. They could create opportunities. They could lead to lower consumption of precious resources and more productive use of what we do consume. They could allow people to set and achieve better-defined, more ambitious goals and curb destructive behaviors, replacing them with positive actions. Used in organizations or communities, they can help groups work together to take on more daunting challenges. In short, the feedback loop is an age-old strategy revitalized by state-of-the-art technology. As such, it is perhaps the most promising tool for behavioral change to have come along in decades.

In response to grower input from the 2010 pilots, data input requirements have been significantly scaled down for this year’s pilot.  The metric calculator is designed to provide instant feedback: growers enter data and receive baseline calculations about their on-farm stewardship of water, soil, nutrient and energy resources.   This information will likely include:

• Water use efficiency by acre and unit of production
• Simple irrigation efficiency using crop evapotranspiration
• Soil organic matter as compared with the soil’s potential
• Nitrogen and phosphorus use efficiency by acre and unit of production
• Energy use by acre and unit of production

 Grower input is critical to the Stewardship Index process. By piloting these metrics, growers will provide and receive valuable information on:

• Usefulness of the metrics for evaluating sustainable performance within specific crops and regions.
• Usefulness of the metrics for improving business operations and efficiency.
• Clarity of data collection tools and availability of data.
• Usefulness of the data in answering buyer inquiries.

Look for a complete suite of Stewardship Index metrics tools, including the calculator and a user guide, in the next month. A number of webinars will be planned to demo the calculator for potential users.

If you are interested in piloting the Stewardship Index metrics, please contact Jessica Siegal at jessica@stewardshipindex.org or 707 331 1810.

Pilot participants discussed the following questions:

                - Which metrics are most meaningful to your farming operation?

                - How should the draft metrics be improved?

                - How can data collection be made easier?

It was instructive to hear directly from the growers who are testing the Stewardship Index metrics in their operations. Input from these webinars will be considered carefully as we revise metrics and data collection approaches.

In February, the Coordinating Council agreed to advance a select list of fully developed and tested metrics for release in a SISC “Beta Version 1.0” for use in more widespread piloting.  This week, the Coordinating Council discussed the results of the webinars and considered which metrics should be included in the Beta version.  There was agreement to include metrics for water, nutrients, energy and soil, although some (mostly minor) revisions to these will be proposed to the metric workgroups for comment.    The Coordinating Council will finalize the list of metrics to be included after considering comments from the relevant workgroups. We will continue to develop the metrics that are not included in the Beta version with the goal of including them in the future.

The goals of of the 2011 metrics pilot testing will be to  further evaluate their utility and practicality and tocollect enough data for a number of crops that the data can be anonymized, aggregated, and shared with pilot participants.  This will enable SISC to test assumptions about the value of aggregating and sharing data.

Some highlights from the recent webinars with pilot participants:

• A large majority of the participants identified the soil, water use, energy and nutrients metrics are the most valuable to growers.. Most participating growers are already collecting substantial data in these categories. With a few exceptions, there was broad interest in piloting these metrics (with revisions) again in 2011.

• Some growers see SISC metrics and as an opportunity to strengthen their data collection efforts in areas where they could use more knowledge about their operation and operating efficiency; organize or validate information they are already collecting; and get credit for work they are already doing. These participants expressed interest t re-piloting in 2011 and to continue following the SISC metric evolution process..

• Other participants felt  that they are already collecting this data in other formats that are better suited to their management needs. Those growers would likely not use SISC metrics unless required to do so.

• Simple calculator tools designed to increase ease of data collection and ease of input allocation at the field level will be a welcome addition to the 2011 pilot binder but only if the value of the information gathered outweighs the time and energy required to gather it. This is particularly relevant in terms of energy. Many growers felt that they would have to see and test such calculators before concluding if they were helpful.

• One grower expressed strong interest in the creation of a questionnaire for the buyer members of the Coordinating Council about their sustainability performance and intended use of grower performance data, as an entre for more open discussions about sharing the cost of sustainability across the supply chain.

• Multiple growers said that the core value of SISC metrics was in communicating to buyers the information they are already collecting, and the potential for relief of regulatory burden.

The Index joined John Foraker, CEO, Annie's Homegrown, and Mitch Willis, Manager, Citrus Procurement Quality & Ag Sustainability, Tropicana, on a panel titled "Agriculture 2.0 2020 Outlook," moderated by Ed Keaney, Principal, Mindful Investors. Over 170 senior decision makers of the agriculture investment, technology and agribusiness industries were present at the Hilton San Francisco Union Square for the fifth edition of the popular Agriculture 2.0 conference series. Attendees participated in robust discussions on the future trajectory of the global food system, price drivers, and how to best play their hand when entering what for many players is a new asset class.

Sustainability was on the forefront as participants learned about breakthroughs in biopesticides, cultured meat, open-ocean aquaculture, fuel additives from orange peels, energy generation from livestock waste, climate change effects on farmland investments and the future of sustainability metrics in the agrifood supply chain. Over the course of the two days, management teams presented their proprietary technologies in front of prospective investors as well as their peers and colleagues through the Ag 2.0 Venture Fair.

For more information, please visit: http://www.iirusa.com/AG20SF/homepage.xml

Details:

Sustainability Partnerships: Standards, Metrics & Markets
U.S. agriculture and food system firms face unprecedented opportunities and challenges in meeting demands for sustainability. Conceptions of sustainable food systems continue to evolve and, worldwide, situations vary broadly including environmental, economic and social conditions.  Yet, despite the uncertainty surrounding definitions, measurement, and public policies related to sustainability, powerful forces are leading to innovative and dynamic partnerships for sustainability.  This session will investigate how these partnerships can produce meaningful information upon which to base sustainability decisions throughout supply chains and to build and satisfy market demands for sustainable consumption and production.
Moderator: Carol Kramer-LeBlanc, Director of Sustainable Development, USDA, Washington, DC

Sustainability Information
Speaker: Simon Liu, USDA National Agricultural Library, USDA, Beltsville, MD

Sustainability Index for Specialty Crops
Speaker: Barbara Meister, Marketing & Communications Manager, SureHarvest, Soquel, CA

Walmart Sustainability: Building for the Next Generation
Speaker: Beth Keck, Senior Director of Sustainability, Walmart, Bentonville, AR

For more info, http://www.usda.gov/oce/forum/

Attention all stakeholders!  The Stewardship Index for Specialty Crops (SISC) is currently receiving feedback from the 2010 pilot testing process and will go through an intense revision process to prepare the first cluster of metrics for public comment by April 30, 2011.  We need your active engagement and participation in webinars coming up in late January and early February, and throughout the metric revisions process that will occur from February-April.  Webinar dates and registration can be found on the metric workgroup pages at www.stewardshipindex.org. 

The 2011 workplan for the Metric Development Process is as follows:

January/Early February:              Pilot feedback webinars

February 10-11:                          Coordinating Council meeting

February – April:                         Metric revision work by workgroups

April 15:                                     Deadline for metric revisions

Late April:                                     Metric review by Coordinating Council

May:                                                 Public comment period

July:                                                 First version of working metrics released

Results and feedback from pilot testing SISC for the 2010 growing season are currently being processed, anonymized, and analyzed.  All metric workgroups with piloted metrics will be convened (with the exception of the on-farm pesticide metric which is being addressed by the Coordinating Council separately) in late January or early February via webinars.  During these webinars, analyses of feedback on data collection and qualitative observations on the metric data will be presented.  Metric data itself will not be presented at this time.  These webinars will launch the metric revision process, which will continue from February to mid-April.

Stakeholders can contribute their input via webinars, participation in small revision workgroups which will be launched during the webinars, or via comments on our new and improved website portal. 

On February 10 and 11, the Coordinating Council will hold a meeting to review pilot results and evaluate whether the data itself is necessary and appropriate to share with the metric workgroups.  Those workgroups to which the Coordinating Council passes on metric data will hold webinars in the second half of February.

April 15 is the deadline for metric revisions.  Workgroups will make recommendations to the Coordinating Council on whether the metrics are ready to be considered working metrics or require another season of pilot testing.  The Coordinating Council will hold a call in late April to discuss.  Those metrics which are accepted as working metrics will be posted online for a 30-day comment period.  At the end of this comment period, the Coordinating Council will review public comment and approve or revises the metrics as appropriate.

With this timeline, we are aiming to have an initial set of SISC Working Metrics available for public use by July 2011.  Work on metrics still in development or continuing in pilot phase will continue during this time

"Walmart has one of the world's largest food supply chains and is committed to reducing and optimizing the resources required to produce that food and driving more transparency into its supply chain. For the first time Walmart will ask suppliers about the water, energy, fertilizer and pesticide they use per unit of food produced. The goals include: accelerating the agricultural focus of the Sustainability Index, beginning with a Sustainable Produce Assessment for top producers in its Global Food Sourcing network in 2011..."

While Walmart’s Ron McCormick, senior director of local and sustainable produce sourcing, has been a participant on the Coordinating Council since the inception of the Stewardship Index for Specialty Crops, the press coverage left us wondering, Will Walmart utilize the metrics developed by the Stewardship Index for Specialty Crops?

We raised this question with Beth Keck, Senior Director Sustainability, who replied that, indeed, Walmart wants a shared process for developing a system to measure sustainability.  In her words:

"Walmart is a founding member of the Sustainability Consortium (sustainabilityconsortium.org) and works with other similar organizations such as the Stewardship Index for Specialty Crops to encourage creation of a shared process for measuring sustainability that is based in science. We support work such as that being undertaken by the Stewardship Index and the Field to Market Alliance to create processes for measurement and reporting while letting us all work together to create a safer, more sustainable future."

 The aim of the Stewardship Index is to produce widely-supported metrics that can be utilized by growers and others along the specialty crop supply chain, to benchmark, compare, and communicate their sustainability performance in a transparent way. By collaborating with stakeholders such as Walmart we aim to develop agreement on a common approach that will prevent duplicative measurement and reporting programs for sustainability.