responsible leather€¦ · textile exchange 2030 strategy: climate+ textile exchange announced its...
TRANSCRIPT
Responsible LeatherInternational Working Group Meeting #4(RL IWG)
Tuesday, November 26th, 2019
Anti-Trust Statement
Textile Exchange convenes the textile community and values diversity of views, expertise, opinions,
backgrounds, and experiences. It is expected that members of this community will collaborate by sharing ideas, information, and resources of publicly available
information only and avoid discussions on price, strategic plans or other private and sensitive information.
Chatham House Rule
“When a meeting, or part thereof, is held under the Chatham House Rule, participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity not the
affiliation of the speaker(s), nor that of any other participant, may be revealed.”
Zoom Control Panel Instructions
Upon entering the meeting, please make sure you are muted.
You can see other meeting participants.
Please use the chat function to ask questions or ask to speak.
1. RL Review2. Shared Updates3. Vancouver Update4. Progress Report
• Funding5. Scope Committee Updates
• Deforestation/Conversion - Free• Leather Production• Animal Welfare• Traceability • Claims
6. Next Steps
Agenda
Responsible Leather is a Textile Exchange initiative aimed at addressing the many issues found within the global leather value chain; it encompasses the Responsible Leather Round
Table (RLRT) and the development of the Responsible Leather Program (RLP).
What is Responsible Leather?
Responsible Leather Round Table (RLRT)
Scope Committees
Members selected based on expertise and willingness to commit time.
Deforestation / Conversion-Free
Leather Production
Responsible Leather International Working Group (RL IWG)
Voting Members Non-voting Members
Governance
Committee Committee
Animal WelfareOversees RLRT + RL IWG
All stakeholders
Claims (TBD) Impact Credits
Responsible Leather Meetings Structure
Responsible Leather Round Table (RLRT) Meetings
1x per Quarter | 3rd Tuesday | 9:00 AM – 10:30 AM ESTShared industry updates, update on RL IWG work. Each meeting with have a theme, with 2-3 guest speakers
presenting their work; Q&A/discussion to follow.
RL International Working Group (RL IWG) Meetings
Once every 2 months | 1st Tuesday | 9:00 AM – 10:30 AM ESTKey items up for review will be shared, otherwise, summaries of Committee work will be presented as an FYI, with
opportunities for feedback/voting when necessary.
Scope Committee Meetings
1-2x per month, as determined by Committee leadMeet as needed to discuss key areas; outcomes will be presented to the IWG for feedback and voting, when necessary.
Responsible Leather Program (RLP)
The Responsible Leather Program (RLP), which is being developed through the Responsible Leather International Working Group (RL IWG), will establish a benchmark of agreed-upon best practices, which aims to identify and give recognition to existing industry standards. As a part of the RLP, a Responsible Leather Toolkit will be created which brands utilize for their sourcing. Most importantly, it will give everyone the ability to clearly and effectively communicate about their actions.
Responsible Leather Program (RLP)
Leather Production benchmark
Animal Welfare
benchmarkDCF protocol
Impact Credits
(traceability)
Responsible Leather Toolkit
Claims Framework
Cow-calf farm
Raising farm
Finishing farm Slaughter Tannery 1 Tannery 2 Tannery 3 Production Brand/retail
The RLP give brands a tool to communicate their expectations and support of best practices to their supply chains, and to talk about their actions to their consumers and stakeholders.
Shared Updates
• Climate Emergency: 11,000 Scientists confirm that Earth “clearly and unequivocally faces a climate emergency”https://www.seti.org/more-than-11000-scientists-confirm-earth-climate-emergency
• Fires continue in the Amazon: “From January to the end of September, 85% more rainforest had been chopped down than in the same period last year, and as a result there had been over 70,000 fires, a 30% increase from 2018.”
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/vb5n54/why-the-amazon-is-really-on-fire-and-why-its-going-to-keep-burning
• Leather in decline: A new poll shows many UK consumers are no longer sold on leather clothing, with a growing ethical backlash a worry for the industry
https://www.voguebusiness.com/sustainability/fur-leather-luxury-poll-peta
• Other Updates? (feel free to type into the chat box)
In the News
Vancouver Update
https://textileexchange.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/2019_Overview-Report_Final.pdf
TEXTILE EXCHANGE 2030 STRATEGY: CLIMATE+
Textile Exchange announced its new 2030 Strategy: Climate+ (pronounced Climate-Plus) during its annual Textile Sustainability Conference that took place in October 2019. Under the Climate+ strategic direction, Textile Exchange will be the driving force for urgent climate action with a goal of 35-45% reduced CO2 emissions from textile fiber and material production by 2030. [1],[2]
[1] Scope is pre-spinning. Measured from a 2017 baseline; subject to Science Based Targets validation.[2] The range reflects the additional work we would like to do to ensure our target is aligned with a 1.5-degree Celsius scenario (defined by the UN IPCC), aligned with Science Based Targets as well as with the UNFCCC Fashion Climate Charter.
Responsible Leather Round Table Summit
Producers
Retailers
NGOs
Specialists
Brands
Over 80 participants!
https://responsibleleather.org/meetings/rlrt-meetings/
Progress Report
Responsible Leather Progress
DCF Animal Welfare
TraceabilityLeather -Social
Leather -Environmental
Credits
Canada2017 2018 2019
Q2, 2020 Q4, 2020
IrelandMay 24
ClaimsTool
2020
1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr
To be completed Completed
…
Big Decisions
• Animal Welfare and Deforestation/Conversion-Free credits will be decoupled
• Will aim to have first draft completed in Q1 of 2020• Credit determinations
SUPPORT
We still need your support! We are in the home stretch, but we will need your help to get us to the end line:
• Become an IWG member• sign the RL IWG Charter (to follow)
• Attend key calls• Give feedback• Set aside budget to keep us funded
Scope Committee Updates
DCF Committee Updates
• Agreement on definitions and targets• Draft verification requirements in alignment
with the Accountability Framework
• Reference CFA guidelines• Finalize verification requirements• Cut off date TBD
Deforestation/Conversion-Free Progress
1st Qtr 2nd Qtr
Accountability Framework Definitions
Deforestation-free (synonym: no-deforestation): Commodity production, sourcing, or financial investments that do not cause or contribute to deforestation of natural forests. For companies and supply chains, the appropriate policy and goal is “no gross deforestation” (a “net” approach is NOT appropriate).
Conversion-free (synonym: no-conversion): Commodity production, sourcing, or financial investments that do not cause or contribute to conversion of natural ecosystems. For companies and supply chains, the appropriate policy and goal is “no gross conversion” (a “net” approach is NOT appropriate).
DCF Verification
• Must be done by a credible third party organization
• Must indicate clear boundaries of the property (property polygon)
• Validation will require map-based comparison of forest/natural ecosystem coverage from cut-off date and yearly afterwards (via remote sensing)
• Data must be made available to the auditing body
Cut Off Date
A cut-off date is a date after which forest conversion is prohibited.
A too ambitious cut-off date can lead to only those producers producing far from the forest frontier being certified while those responsible for deforestation are not certified and do not have any incentive to change practices..
On the one hand, a static cut-off date set some time ago in the past can be a guarantee that forests have not been cleared. Furthermore, producers that have set ambitious targets early on to halt deforestation are rewarded for their pioneering or early mover efforts.
Cut Off Date2008• Baseline that is already accepted in most countries affected by deforestation
2020• Matches timing of Responsible Leather and New York Declaration on Forests
and Target 15.2 of SDGs
Survey to follow
Leather Production Committee Updates
• Outreach with existing standards• LWG bronze has been set as baseline threshold• Gap analysis begun with other production
standards• Traceability work started
• Finalize benchmarking criteria and assessment protocol
• Complete gap analysis• Set traceability protocol
Leather Production - Environmental
Responsible Leather Production sub-scopes
Environment
Social and labour conditions
Traceability
Environmental baseline = Leather Working Group standard• LWG is a leather processing standard recognized by the industry• Growth in the adoption of the LWG in the sector (450 manufacturers certified)• LWG is impact driven
Responsible Leather production: Environmental Baseline
Leather Production Responsible Leather benchmark baseline
LWG Std.B Std.C Std.D Std.E
Environmental Benchmark = Leather Working Group
(Bronze level)
LWG Standard B Standard C Standard D
Option 1: LWG certification only
Benchmark
Traceability
Slaughterhouse
Audit Protocol - Section 4• The current environmental audit requires companies to have visibility through the supply chain of their raw
material.
• Raw Materials in Brazil:• Those sourcing raw material in Brazil will need to demonstrate traceability to the slaughterhouse including
the date of slaughter. Suppliers sourcing from Brazil will need to ensure that the meat packers, where the material originates, meet minimum acceptable criteria.
• Raw Materials from the Rest of the World:• All raw material suppliers from other parts of the world must be able to supply the following information:
• ➢ Name of the slaughterhouse and Breakdown of slaughterhouses if relevant
LWG traceability criteria
Brand commitment over a 5 or 10 year period:
1. Must commit to securing 100% of their hide use through credits within 5 years
2. Must commit to mapping their leather production and meeting the RLA in their entire leather supply chain to:• YEAR 1: Finishing • YEAR 2: Splitting/post-tanning • YEAR 3: Tanning operations • YEAR 4: Beamhouse• YEAR 5: Slaughterhouse
3. Required to report progress by completing the CFMB leather module on a yearly basis
Program Supporter: DRAFT CONCEPT
• Identify high risk issues to be addressed• Map out existing standards and tools• Work with Textile Exchange Integrity team
on a common approach that will work across multiple fibers and materials
Leather Production - Social
Animal Welfare Committee Updates
• Animal welfare framework developed• Key standards are unofficially mapped• Initial benchmark set• Progressive strategy developed
• Confirm final benchmarks• Begin formal assessments• Piloting
Animal Welfare
• Reminder: We are developing a benchmark, not a standard
• If we have a single level benchmark and we set the requirements too high, no existing global standard will have equivalence.
• If we have a single level benchmark and we set the requirements too low, there is no reward for beef farmers operating under programs with higher welfare requirements.
• What alternative models are we exploring?
Animal Welfare
• Animal welfare framework developed for use for all species/fibers/leather
• Last IWG: presentation of a proposal to have different levels within the AW benchmark aligned with the TE preferred fibers matrix
• Improved• Progressive• Advanced
Animal Welfare Update: Recap
Status-Quo(Conventional
Materials)
Improved(Minimizing
harmful impacts)
Progressive(Maximizing
positive effects)
Advanced(Regenerative
production systems: best practice implemented)
• RLRT meeting at the TE conference: presentation of further development of the proposal to have different levels and how existing certifications might fit into this benchmark
• Review of the main sections of the AW framework and requirements that might fall into each of the three levels.
Animal Welfare Update: Recap
Current position
Three options:
• Not improved, progressive, advanced• Simply option A, option B & option C• Simplified benchmark focusing on key welfare
outcomes• Best practice/improvement criteria cited with
intent that these become required in future years
Option A - proposal
• Feed of suitable quality and quantity for the animals’ age and needs• Adequate supply of clean water• No abuse/mistreatment• Sufficient space in lots and/or
housing• Protection from heat/cold
stress• Responsible use of
antimicrobials
Option A - proposal
• No spaying heifers or cows• No confinement on fully slatted floors at
any stage of the animals’ lives.• All other housing/finishing/feedlot
systems OK• All other painful procedures OK
(castration/disbudding/dehorning)
Option B - proposal
• Maximum age for castration• Maximum age for disbudding/dehorning• Requirements for transport (space/thermal comfort/ventilation)• Maximum transport duration• Stricter handling requirements –
no electric prods/electro-immobilization
• No poisons/snares/traps for predators
• Housing/feedlots as at option A
Option C - proposal
• Grass based systems• No confinement at any stage of the
animal’s life [no feedlots]
• Pain relief for painful procedures [future requirement]
Other considerations
• Taking account of legislation when benchmarking animal welfare programs• Traceability as part of animal welfare programs• Audit protocols for animal welfare programs
• How often beef farms are audited• Who audits [internal/third party]• Frequency of audit
Next steps
• Finalize requirements for each of the three options
• Include development criteria/best practice for future requirements
• Check with informal review against example certifications
• Pilot phase
Traceability Committee Updates
• Concept developed, key processes set• Initial modeling• ChainPoint and ACT Commodities
connection • Impact Alliance agreement in principle
• MOUs and contracts• Set work plans and define Impact and data
to be collected (Alliance)• Development of trading platform• Begin pilot programs
Impact Credits
How to connect brands with farms to recognize best practices?
Birthing farms Slaughter
Tanning Finishing Sewing Brand/retail
Backgrounder farm
Direct farm
Beamhouse
Feedlot
1.7 billion cows on 140 million farms
Why do we need credits?
• Address long, opaque and/or complex supply chains• Drive scale at the farm level by offering an efficient and effective means for
brands to support best practices • Address the price paradigm by eliminating the mark-up on farm premiums
m/u
$1
m/u m/u m/u m/u m/u m/u
$XX
$1 $1.0X
Identity-Preserved ModelThe initial premium paid to the farmer gets multiplied by the normal mark-ups as materials pass from one point to the next along the supply chain.
Credit Trading ModelThe final brand supports the farmer for meeting best practice through the credit trading platform, with a small fee taken to support the program.
$.0X
Impact Partnership Credits
Data collection
Increased availability of responsible and
traceable cattle
Trainings
Verification
Program Partner
Farmers/Farm Groups
Brands
Data
Stories
Credibility
Impact Partnership Credit
trading
$$
$$
Facilitator
• Impact Partnerships will be set up to help drive progress towards the benchmark thresholds. Brands will give money to program partners that will then work with producers on capacity building, data collection, verification and trading support
• Producers can be part of the Impact Partnership for up to three years.
• When they exit the partnership, they can trade credits directly (which is a financial incentive)
• Brands can also make long-term commitments to buy partnership credits
Impact Credit trading
Impact Partnerships –Helping Make Change Happen
Animal Welfare
Farm Group A Farm Group B Farm C
Impa
ct
Cre
dits
Impa
ct
Part
ners
hips
Environmental Welfare
Social Welfare
Brands will have multiple sourcing models
Impact Partnership Credits
Impact Credits
Physical Trading
Brands can use different strategies:
Buy credits to match sourcing regions
Buy credits to meet targets
Combination
Brands have a path forward
year
100% of leather use balanced with Responsible Leather Impact
Credits or Impact Partnerships
2025 2030 2040
50% of leather sourced from fully traceable Responsible
Leather supply chains
50% of leather use balanced with Responsible Leather Impact
Credits or Impact Partnerships
100% of leather sourced from fully traceable Responsible
Leather supply chains
We have been working!
(Join us for a moment in the weeds)
6.a Concept: Credit and Payment Flow
Credit Platform
Facilitator
ResponsibleLeather
IMPACT ALLIANCE
Farm or Farm Group
Brand
Verification Body
1.
2
3 5
$
$
$
$
Claims
4
6
7
9
8
1011
Facilitation fee: to be transparent
$
6.e.1. Credit Calculations: Brands : Option Chosen
Top grain
Split
Etc.
Allocation Options
Y%(based on thickness,
weight or value)
X%(based on thickness,
weight or value)
Z%(based on thickness,
weight or value)
Option A Option B
+ Most accurate- Complicated to
determine
Option C
+ Simple- Leads to double counting of hides
+ Simple+ No double counting of hides
- Less accurate
0% 0%
100%(1 credit)
50%(1/2 credit)
50%(1/2 credit)
100%(1 credit)
6.e.2 Credit Calculations: Farms: Sample Calculation
Cow/Calf
Raising
Finishing
100 7020
100 50
200 100 200 200
Slaughter
Other Farms
50
Other Farms
30
Other Farms
500
Other Farms
150
6.e.2 Credit Calculations: Farms: Sample Calculation
Cow/Calf
Raising
Finishing
Farm Level # cows # months cow is on the farm
Cow month equivalents
100
70
20
100
50
700
x
x
x
x
x
x
12
6
12
12
5
1
+
+
+
=
=
=
=
=
=
1200
420
240
1200
250
700
1860
1450
700
Cow equivalents
Credits to sell
(= cow months/12)
155
121
58
52
40
19
(yearly cow equivalent per stage )
(= cow equivalents/3)
Claims Framework Updates
• Research on claims strategies for similar systems
• Initial work with Integrity Team to set up claims structure for different materials and traceability systems
• Set final language for claims: what is allowed and what is not allowed, where can claims be made.
• Logos
Claims
4 opportunities to communicate about Responsible Leather
PurchasingImpact Credits
Purchasing Partnership Credits Program Supporter Full
RL Toolkit User
Responsible Leather Program
Support claim RL Product claimCommitment claim
Commitment claim
With Impact Credits…
NO guarantee can be made that any Responsible Leather is physically present in the finished product and in what quantity.
Allowed messaging should focus on claiming support of responsible leather production, and not the content of the product itself.
1. Should we allow on-product claims about Impact Credits or Impact Partnership Credits?
2. Should the allowed language be strict and prescriptive, or should we allow for more flexibility?
3. Do we need different logos for each category? (i.e., Impact Credits, Program Supporter, Tool User, etc.). Does the logo(s) need to have Textile Exchange’s name on it?
Vancouver RLRT Table Discussion Questions
On-Product claims should not be allowed On-Product claims should be allowed
Not product-related, so meaningless Strict, clear language is needed if allowed
Only if the company is talking about initiatives somewhere else (for added context)
Important for driving uptake
Need a clearly differentiated logo
Requirement for how many credits are purchased
1. Should we allow on-product claims about Impact Credits or Impact Partnership Credits?
Strict & Prescriptive Language Flexible Language
Needs to be strict, but with a wide range of options for different types of uses
There should be some room for more customized statements to be made, at minimum in high profile cases (and possibly with approval from Textile Exchange). Brands should have room to tell the story of their credits, esp with IPCs.
Should be simple + straightforward
Criteria should be in place to avoid generic statements implying that more is covered than is the case
2. Should the allowed language be strict and prescriptive, or should we allow for more flexibility?
Level of communication
Off-product
We are buying:
Impact Credits
Messaging ALLOWED
• Supports the production of Responsible Leather [in XX region] [by purchasing Impact Credits]
• Supporting Responsible Leather production [in XX region] through the purchase of Impact Credits
Messaging NOT ALLOWED
• Any wording that will mislead the consumer to believe product(s) are certified On-product?
Impact PartnershipCredits
• Supports [impact] programs working with beef producers to achieve Responsible Leather-approved practices [in XX region]
• Supporting Responsible Leather [through the purchase of Credits]
• Any wording that will mislead the consumer to believe product(s) are certified On-product?
Off-product
Different logos Textile Exchange name on logo
Yes Same basic logo, but a differentiator No Does not need TE’s name on it
Yes Yes, we do need different logos for each category – avoid green washing so we want it to be very, very clear
No Perhaps not the whole name and logo – it could be a “nod” to it
No Impact Credits vs IPCs should have the same logo. Differentiation can happen in the text.
TBD TE name should come from broader strategy internally (TE standards logos)
Yes Different logos for the credit schemes, but the RL Program logo doesn’t seem useful for brands
No No TE logo for consumer-facing, but should be there for B2B communications
No Nuances will be confusing to consumers, so simplicity is better – good to include link to more info for those who seek it
3. Do we need different logos for each category? Does the logo need to have Textile Exchange’s name on it?
• Do you have experience developing claims framework/guidance for sustainability standards or programs? If yes, please contact [email protected] to join the Claims Committee.
• Claims Committee meetings will commence at the start of 2020 and plan to go until Q3• Areas of work and topics of discussion/decision-making include:
• Defining key terms• Building Claims Framework for the Responsible Leather Program
• Program commitments• Allowed language for making claims• How to communicate about Impact Credits
• Logo development• Etc.
Next Steps for Claims
Next Steps
2020 Meeting Schedule –invitations coming soonDate Meeting Time
Q1
Tues. Feb 4 Responsible Leather IWG 9:00-10:30 AM EST
Tues. Feb 25 Responsible Leather Round Table (RLRT) 9:00-10:30 AM EST
TBD March Responsible Leather Webinar Series: Pt 1 TBD
Q2
Tues. Apr 7 Responsible Leather IWG 9:00-10:30 AM EST
Tues. May 12 Responsible Leather Round Table (RLRT) 9:00-10:30 AM EST
Tues. June 2 Responsible Leather IWG 9:00-10:30 AM EST
TBD June Responsible Leather Webinar Series: Pt 2 TBD
Q3
Tues. July 21 Responsible Leather Round Table (RLRT) 9:00-10:30 AM EST
Tues. Aug 4 Responsible Leather IWG 9:00-10:30 AM EST
TBD September Responsible Leather Webinar Series: Pt 3 TBD
Q4TBD November Responsible Leather Round Table Summit 9:00-5:00 PM Dublin
Tues. Dec 8 Responsible Leather IWG 9:00-10:30 AM EST
1. Voting on Deforestation “cut-off” date2. Decoupling AW and DCF Impact Credits3. Finalizing Animal Welfare levels
Feedback to be submitted through Feedback Form – to be created and shared via email and website
RL IWG - upcoming opportunities for feedback & voting
We will be sending funding letters along with a digital pledge form to support out 2020 work.
Funding Request
TextileExchange.org
© Copyright Notice
This presentation is protected by U.S. and International copyright laws.
Textile Exchange welcomes you to use slides from this collection for your presentations on the condition that:• The slides are not altered from the way it is presented in its original format, this includes changing colors and style.
• The Textile Exchange logo should not be removed.• Adding logos and/or content is not permitted without written permission from Textile Exchange.
• Any presentation using this content or any form of this content should acknowledge Textile Exchange as the author.
Thank you