National | PANORAMA

Building an inclusive policy

Logo of Organic Denmark

Organic Denmark

Rooted in the Danish political ambition to design policies that enable the private and public sector to become more innovative and competitive, the Minister of Agriculture put in place clear procedures for involving relevant stakeholders in order to ensure that the plan could meet the needs of the sector. Involvement was secured at the beginning of the plan development process based on a year-long consultation process and collaboration with the organic sector.

Preparation was based on a comprehensive process involving more than 200 stakeholders, who participated in three large workshops.
The Organic Food Council, a government-led forum of relevant interest groups, was involved in prioritizing the initiatives recommended, as a result of three workshops and 35 interviews held with key actors in the organic sector.

Stakeholder involvement was key to the Danish Organic Action Plan and ultimately led to its great success.

Planning phase

Inception phase

National

Focus on market development

Girls in organic field - national event Høstmarked

Organic Denmark

Whereas in the past the focus of policy support for organic farming was often production-oriented, the current Danish OAP considers market development (including support for certain marketing channels), promotion and awareness, as well as public procurement, as priorities. The OAP is a mix of push and pull actions. Push effects are meant to increase production, while pull measures aim at increasing the demand for organic products.

If we look at the pull measures, a key action was to stimulate the demand for organic products by consumers and in private and public kitchens, such as schools and hospitals. For these activities, 6.4 million EUR were earmarked in the 2015-2018 period.

Municipalities were motivated through a national goal of achieving 60 per cent organic in all public kitchens and by earmarked funds to support the conversion process, primarily through the education of kitchen leaders and workers, and changes in supply chains and menus.

The aforementioned measure was highly successful. For instance, the city of Copenhagen succeeded in developing one of the most ambitious public procurement programmes in Europe, which met the goal of 90 per cent organic food in 2015, without an increase in meal prices.

Implementation

Review phase

National

Reorientation

Happy pigs in the field

Organic Denmark

The history of governmental support to organic farming in Denmark starts in 1987, when the Danish Parliament adopted the Organic Farming Act, which laid down the basic structure of Danish organic farming policy, which still remains today. Permanent subsidies for organic farming were introduced in 1994. Early Organic Action Plans (OAPs) were established from 1995 to 1999.

The current OAP ‘Working together for more organics’ covers the period 2011 to 2020. It was revised and expanded in 2015, following a change of Government. The plan aims at doubling the land area of organic production by 2020 (against a baseline of 2007), and earmarks specific budgets over the period 2015 to 2018 to a set of different action-points. This plan was initiated by the Ministry for Agriculture and developed with the assistance of an external consultant.

The Danish Organic Action Plan was developed through the involvement of a broad spectrum of stakeholders in charge of defining the action points of the plan through several cycles of interviews, questionnaires and workshops. Since the 80s Denmark has been a forerunner in governmental support to sustainable agriculture, but the country is also a worldwide pioneer when it comes to designing policies according to inclusive and participatory approaches.

Whereas in the past the focus of policy support for organic farming was often production-oriented, the current Danish OAP considers market development (including support for certain marketing channels), promotion and awareness, as well as public procurement, as priorities.
The OAP is a mix of push and pull actions. Push effects are meant to increase production, while pull measures aim at increasing the demand for organic products.

Frugal Rehabilitation Demonstration (FRD): developing and adapting the methodology (FRM) through action-research

Once demonstration sites are selected, local ASM groups receive training and are contracted to implement FRM through six steps:

Preparation & Planning: degradation, boundary, hydrological & equipment assessments; labor, volume estimates; waste management; OHS standards
Technical Rehabilitation: infill, regrading and reprofiling; use of limited mechanisation
Topsoils: identification, conservation and re-distribution across sites
Biological Rehabilitation: topsoil enrichment ; natural regeneration assessments; identification of native and key vegetation communities; seed collection; seeds and natural fertilizers distribution into topsoils; tree, shrub and grass plantings
Mitigation Hierarchy: integrating rehabilitation planning into active ASM design and operations so as to reduce primary environmental impacts and unnecessary rehabilitation efforts
Handover of completed rehabilitation site to relevant government administrations for approval/sign-off

National and local government permission to implement Frugal Rehabilitation Demonstration projects.
Resources to fund demonstration labour effort and technical application of methodology at site.
ASM capacity and willingness to receive training and implement the methodology on site.

Successful application of the FRM: all the key physical and ecological requirements for successful rehabilitation are (with few exceptions) available within reasonable proximity of the site. They just need to be identified and adapted to context.
Habitat rehabilitation targeted to native vegetation communities can be successful without the use of non-native species.
Identification and recovery of topsoils are critical to success.
Biological rehabilitation works well together with topsoil seedbank to establish a path to ecological recovery.
Low level mechanised approaches to heavy-lifting of material in topographic filling can be effective but a dependence on mechanisation in the later stages of rehabilitation is not recommended. Overuse of machinery in these latter phases can result in reduced capacity for biological recovery.
FRM can be applied in abandoned areas, where mineral reserves are exhausted, and it can also be integrated into current ASM operations to reduce rehabilitation efforts.
Handover and sign-off from local authorities is key to ensure ongoing commitment.

Documentation and dissemination of results

Establishment of National FRM working group with government and sectoral stakeholders

On the basis that government ministries are willing and able to work together to develop solutions to address impacts of ASM on the wider environment, Protected Areas and on stakeholders impacted by such mining activity, a national working group (which includes such ministries, agencies and relevant representative stakeholders) needs to be established. This will help steer the process of project engagement with local government, artisanal miners and wider stakeholders at the local level to set the scene for Frugal Rehabilitation Demonstration (FRD). A key step in this process is to select sites for FRD that can serve the development and application of the methodology within the ecological, economic and social context. The purpose of establishing this FRM working group is to ensure a participatory, consultative approach to the development of the methodology, and to enable a demonstration site selection process that ensures an informed and strategic approach based on agreed criteria. Sites selected for methodology demonstration need to be typical, representative and associated with formalised ASM capacity to undertake the rehabilitation.

The key enabling factors were the collaborative approach to developing the FRM and adequate resources to undertake the participatory approach both at meetings and in the field. The working group was involved in a coordinated travel program to select, assess, monitor and review rehabilitation progress and approaches at sites.

The working group’s participation and involvement in the development of the FRM was critical to its eventual endorsement and adoption. Key ministries and associated agencies played a role in selecting FRD sites, visiting them through the rehabilitation process and discussing the development of a methodology that was informed through action-research across a range of representative sites. It was also important to have exposure and engagement with formalised artisanal miners, who were keen to participate in the work and help develop a mechanism for promoting best practice and their association with such practice.

Planning phase

Implementation

Monitoring

Documentation and dissemination of results

Ministerial and Sectoral Alignment: a partnership-based approach to developing a Frugal Rehabilitation Methodology

Acknowledging and identifying conflicts between ministries and sectoral stakeholders is important. It is important at the early stages of an initiative to recognise these problems and to establish and work through a consultative platform to make the case for a methodology that is of value to all stakeholders, that is inclusive of artisanal miners and the stakeholders impacted by such mining as well as government ministries. It is only through such collaboration that a methodology can be developed that addresses environmental concerns, meets artisanal miners needs for performance-based incentives and access to land, and can be valued by government in formalising condition-based permitting for mining. It is within the context and platform of engagement that the FRM can be demonstrated to be of value to all stakeholders, and deliver outcomes at the local as well as national level.

Government recognition of range of problems across the sector
Government alignment on best environmental practices and effective enforcement
Government willingness to engage in wider partnerships to assess problems associated with informal ASM and to seek solutions and incentives for better environmental practices
National and stakeholder willingness for ASM formalisation to be conditional on environmental performance
ASM sector willing to implement FRM
Stakeholders willing to endorse ASM licensing based on improved environmental practices

It is critical for the initiative to have support from the national government, as a gateway to engaging with local government and other local stakeholders impacted by artisanal mining. Also, it is important that leading ministries that may potentially hold conflicting views (e.g. mining and environment) appreciate and support the initiatives’ capacity for developing solutions and approaches that can deliver benefits of interest to all parties (ministries).

Documentation and dissemination of results

Sharing lessons learned for replication

The process of establishing the Pakistan’s first MPA has led to a number of valuable lessons being learned, mainly regarding how stakeholders from various sectors (federal and provincial governments, civil society and academia) can collectively work towards pushing through policies for environmental conservation. Pakistan also has a large coastline, and this process can now be replicated for other sites which are rich in biodiversity. Some other potential MPA sites have already been identified, including Churna Island, Miani Hor, and Gwatar Bay. Through regular meetings of the MFF NCB and other regional gatherings Pakistan continues to share its experience establishing Astola Island MPA and vision to establish additional areas.

Strong interest from policy-makers, IUCN Members and civil society to replicate the process to establish Astola Island MPA in other coastal areas in Pakistan.

The MFF NCB is a valuable 'soft governance' platform. Whilst not a formal body, it's unique membership provide a forum for advocay and policy influence with input from a cross section of stakeholders with an interst in coastal resource managment. The continued engagemnt of the NCB will be vital for supporting the development of a management plan for Astola Island and for achieving sustainable coastal resources management in Pakistan.

Monitoring

Documentation and dissemination of results

Subnational

National

Mulit stakeholder process

The MFF Pakistan National Coordinating Body (NCB) meets to discuss the designation of Astola Island

MFF Pakistan

To support the process of to establish Astola Island MPA, MFF Pakistan utilized the membership of its National Coordinating Body to undertake the necessary feasibility assessments, conduct consultations, and raise awareness about the importance of the area. Membership of the NCB includes several government agencies with an interest in marine and coastal resources, the private sector, and civil society organisations. This unique ‘soft governance’ platform facilitated cross sectoral dialogues and advocacy that enabled the declaration of the MPA more quickly than would have otherwise been possible.

The MFF National Coordinating Body, a unique multi-stakeholder 'soft governance’ platform, provided opportunities to engage partners from relevant sectors in decision making processes
Engagement of non-traditional actors such as Ministry of Defence (MoD) and Pakistan Navy (PN) with their active role in influencing coastal policy decisions.
Face to face advocacy with decision makers, and media engagement

Several previous attempts to establish MPAs in Pakistan had not succeed due to the lack of a systematic approach and engagement of all relevant stakeholders. In this case the MFF NCB proved to be an invaluable asset, providing an inclusive platform the NCB could engage with all the key stakeholders, including the Ministry of Defense and Navy, to develop wider consensus among all involved for the establishment of MPAs in Pakistan.

Planning phase

Subnational

National

MFF Pakistan NCB membership

Partnerships

The project fostered collaboration amongst organisations to work together on a topic of current global interest, Chain of Custody and Traceability.

The main organisations working on this project were MDPI, an Indonesian implementation NGO, AP2HI, an industry association bringing together progressive handline and pole and line tuna companies and the United Nations Industrial Development Organisation (UNIDO) Smart-Fish Indonesia.

All organisations have a strong interest in ensuring industry progress towards and understanding of traceability, and require strong industry relationships to ensure successful project outcomes. This collaborative project allowed organisations with different backgrounds, interests, expertise and objectives to coordinate and work towards achieving their interests within this field.

This approach allowed us to ensure close collaboration with industry, to get their permission to audit their supply chains and to work directly with them on improvement. The collaboration ensured additional funds were available to be leveraged to broaden the focus of the project from not only Chain of Custody but also on the more general concept of traceability, relevant to increasing market and regulatory demands.

New import regulations are coming online in the US market in 2018 and suggestions have been made that the EU will update their regulations within 2018-2019. This made the industry aware that changes and improvements within supply chains are necessary to meet market demands. International projects such as the Smart-Fish Indonesia program and the USAID Oceans project are focusing on the topic of data, traceability and transparency making collaboration easier at this time.

Coordination between various organizations, as was the case in this project, takes time and energy which should be factored into work-planning and budgeting from the onset. This should be taken into account for the implementation phase and for the contracting and reporting phases of a project.

Managing other organisations, in the form of sub-contracts in a wider project, requires very detailed work-planning and deliverable expectation discussions. The outcome of the project relies on good communications about the deliverables and expectations.

All organisations in a larger collaborative effort can work on their own objectives, but a combined vision and some combined objectives are useful to accelerate progress and add strength to the validity and need of the promoted topic. An agreed shared vision can reduce the potential for conflicting approaches being communicated to stakeholders and external partners of the project.

Entirety

National

MSC Chain of Custody Standard

David Agnew presenting a workshop on the MSC Chain of Custody Standard

MDPI

The MSC Chain of Custody ensures products from MSC certified fisheries are traceable. It can be used as a mock audit to create improvement plans or as a framework to improve traceability.

By analysing supply chain characteristics, we categorized companies and their supply chains into one of six supply chain categories/types. This allowed us to make a generic improvement recommendation for each supply chain type, meeting the needs of 18 companies rather than only the nine companies that were mock-audited under the scope of this project.

The MDPI-AP2HI collaboration facilitated connections with industry and encouraged their involvement in the project. The final report was written in a format that allows it to be shared worldwide to benefit other industries. Though the solutions may not directly translate, most internationally-focused supply chains can benefit from it and be able to find simple solutions to improve the CoC/traceability of their supply chains, in turn facilitating their compliance with certifications but also general compliance with international import and export regulations. The report references Key Data Elements that are becoming internationally recognized as the minimum requirements for internationally-recognised traceability.

The collaboration in this project with AP2HI and the progress made in recent years towards MSC Fisheries certification, was important for the project.

Chain of Custody, though a useful approach towards traceability and transparency is not required and lends little benefit to companies if they are not handling certified product, so having the parallel work ongoing was important for this projects success.

Data confidentiality is an important factor to consider when dealing with multiple companies. Before engaging with multiple companies together, you should focus on ensuring that they feel secure and trust that their internal information will not be shared, hence these types of projects should have strong data security approaches and prioritize putting non-disclosure agreements in place with partner companies from the outset. This creates a better working environment with less hesitation.

Follow-up is necessary, though one may presume that implementation of improvement within the supply chains to become more compliant, especially after one-on-one advice and training has been conducted, would be of self-interest to the companies but this is not always the case. Generally companies work better under pressure and with constant reminding.

Implementation

National