According to Defra figures, road and food air miles generated around 18 million tonnes of carbon dioxide in 2004, and transporting fruit and vegetables by air is responsible for 13 per cent of the overall CO2 emissions from food transport.
While this is one of the fresh produce industry’s biggest environmental crimes, there are a multitude of other detrimental practices for which responsibility is placed at the industry’s door - using pesticides, waste and water mismanagement, and inefficient energy use, to name a few.
But despite the criticism, recent years have seen a variety of schemes spring up to help tackle the industry’s environmental impact, and even behemoth organisations such as retailers, inadvertently responsible for some of the worst environmental practises going, are bucking up their ideas, it seems.
Propelled by Defra’s emissions figures, David Miliband has been putting pressure on supermarkets to become more environmentally responsible. And it is not simply a case of government pressure; while supermarkets may have traditionally battled over providing consumers with the cheapest goods, being seen as environmentally friendly undoubtedly appeals to today’s more conscientious ‘green’ consumer.
Tesco has always copped flak for its environmental practices, but the chain has upped its environmental game with the introduction of a 10-point community plan - an attempt to boost its image in the face of the Competition Commission’s impending inquiry into the grocery sector, and win customers on merits other than price and sheer range of product.
It also this year announced a £100 million investment in environmental technology, aiming to halve the energy output from its buildings by 2010 through the installation of energy-saving devices, such as wind turbines.
However, whether the UK’s leading retailer is actually doing enough is still up for discussion, it seems. Its recent curb on carrier-bag use was met with harsh criticism from Friends of the Earth campaigner Sandra Bell who said the retailer’s “very small step” was “greenwash”. “Even if Tesco meets its targets, it will still be handing out three billion bags a year,” she was quoted in the press as saying. “Until it sets ambitious targets for reducing the mountains of food packaging that it is responsible for, it cannot claim to be making a serious commitment to tackling waste.”
However, whether Tesco’s efforts are simply “PR spin” or a concerted effort to help protect the environment, the trend for retailers to improve their practices looks set to grow. Each of the big four retailers has a corporate responsibility ‘manifesto’ available on their websites, which sets out in detail how they are going about making their business more environmentally sustainable. And with Miliband on the case, fulfilling these promises is undoubtedly going to be a higher priority for many chains.
Inevitably, these kinds of policies have a major impact on the supply chain. Producers now have to strive to ensure their practices reflect the standards required by the supermarkets they supply, and this has resulted in many environmental elements being adopted as part of certification schemes. But some organisations are simply responding to a new consumer desire for ethically-produced food.
Linking Environment and Farming (LEAF) is an organisation that aims to raise public understanding of what farmers are achieving through adopting Integrated Farm Management (IFM). It uses a logo - the LEAF Marque - on produce stocked at Waitrose and Fresh and Wild, among other retailers, which recognises good environmental management of farms, but also gives consumers the ability to choose something they know aims to improves the environment for the benefit of wildlife and the countryside, according to the organisation’s Jeremy Boxall. He is positive about the industry’s change in attitude towards the environment, but argues it is not just a case of responding to market pressures: “Without a doubt, [the industry’s attitude] has changed radically - not only because of customer and consumer demand, but also because of the pride farmers take in caring for nature and working with the environment.
“Mistakes were made in the past as we introduced new technology rapidly, but it has changed now. The farming industry does so much for the environment - our countryside is fashioned by generations of farmers and farming businesses. Look around you and you will see, hear and recognise the wonders of nature and how farmers work with it to make Britain and our valuable resources what they are.”
Hugo Hays, integrity director at EurepGAP, agrees. “Sustainability has become an accepted concept with the industry and is included in all aspects of the business,” he says. “Farmers are increasingly aware of client requirements and consumer awareness of production methods ensures that environmentally friendly practices are adopted to woo the customers, as well as because of the farmer’s own conviction.”
Being EurepGAP-certified acts as an assurance that the product has been produced to a high quality under a set of standards and procedures, termed Good Agricultural Practices (GAP). A significant part of this ties in with environmentally-friendly growing and farming methods, according to Hays. Most of the 216 control points dwell on food safety, but are also inextricably linked with environmental protection, such as reducing agrochemical application.
The scheme has been up and running for more than a decade, and Hays says its growing membership from fruit and vegetable producers is a testament to how the industry is now more committed to sustainable growing methods: “The fresh produce industry is increasingly represented with EurepGAP,” he says. “Our certified farmer numbers have doubled for the last three years to 35,000 last December. This creates a huge footprint worldwide, and brings the benefit of being able to approach environmental protection on a holistic basis - for example, reinforcing the requirement for the adoption of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) strategies on farm.”
He says the positive effects of this are particularly evident in more extensive cropping where large areas of top fruit are being produced using IPM, reducing the pesticide load on the environment and working harmoniously with the flora, fauna and wildlife on surrounding farms.
In the UK specifically, working to conserve the countryside is a pivotal part of a new UK government initiative, Environmental Stewardship - an agri-environment scheme that provides funding to farmers and other land managers in England who deliver effective environmental management on their land.
Celebrating its first year anniversary this month - the scheme took over from previous initiaives the Environmental Sensitive Areas Scheme and the Countryside Stewardship Scheme. It is managed by a subsidiary of Defra - the Rural Development Service (RDS), and fundamentally, seeks to conserve the UK’s wildlife, promote biodiversity and maintain the quality and character of the landscape. It also protects historic environments, and natural resources.
The system consists of three parts: Entry Level Stewardship (ELS), open to all farmers and landowners; Organic Entry Level Stewardship (OELS), the organic strand of ELS for organic producers; and Higher Level Stewardship (HLS), targeted environmental management, such as land in more significant environmental areas of the country.
Membership lasts for five years and at ELS level, producers receive £30 per hectare each year for all land entered into the scheme (£60 for OELS). They are then required to meet a ‘points target’ and can choose from more than 50 management options, such as beetle banks for arable land, hedgerow management, taking field corners out of management, nutrient management, which all earn the points.
While only being up and running for a year, 3.18m hectares of land are in scheme at ELS level, equating to 35 per cent of the total agricultural land in England, and constituting 23,000 separate agreements with farmers. At OELS level, which the RDS says it is working to expand in particular, there is currently 121,000ha of land from 990 agreements, and at the top end, HLS has 45,000ha and 650 agreements.
By the end of next year, RDS hopes to have 5.5mha registered at ELS level, which would represent 60 per cent of agricultural land in the country.
David Whealon from RDS, says that while these schemes are a way for farmers to get money back from the modulated Pillar One CAP payments, they also offer long-term investment prospects: “There’s some evidence to say that if you get a nice looking farm, that’s going to be more valuable to sell on…money is the obvious reason why they would come into this, but I hope that above that farmers can see it’s good for them. It’s going to be good for their PR,” he says, adding that the farming industries’ practices are not as bad as is often portrayed. “I think the industry has always been very good. Quite often they’ve been given the message: produce more food, and this is the way to do it. Schemes like this will help their problem with a commercial interest, unless we offer them incentives to conserve the countryside, they could be at competitive loss to do so,” he says.” There’s quite a lot resting on this, whereas before, we had several schemes, this is the one - this is the future.”
But while the UK is clearly moving towards more environment-friendly goals with some conviction, the picture internationally is not so clear-cut. Much of the potential environment-saving techniques and equipment that could be installed to help reduce damage are costly and require a substantial outlay from the producer. And when supermarkets are pushing market prices down the benefits could become harder to grasp.
Hays says that while sustainability is linked closely to cost management, not necessarily higher costs, he thinks the aspect of industry having the most negative impact on the environment comes from those countries who have not been given such guidance: “A lack of adequate legislation in many countries, often combined with poor official communication, surveillance, and especially enforcement practices is the biggest problem related to the environment we encounter around the world.
“One example of this is the lack of workable procedures and of a valid administrative process to enable registration of agrochemicals to be approved for crops, in compliance with national and international safety limits and environmental legislation.
“Another example is the lack or the ineffectiveness of control of environmental protection legislation, which often exists but is not enforced. This makes it difficult for environmentally-responsible farmers to compete with those that are not complying with environmental legislation.”
And while supermarket standards may require that certain protocols are followed in the name of environmental conservation, Rob Robinson, agricultural policy manager at the Environment Agency, is less sure whether supermarkets are a useful force in the fight against environmental damage: “Clearly there are differences between the various companies, and some produce lines differentiate on ‘environmental’ labelling, but we are not convinced that supermarkets are generally drivers of good environmental practice,” he says. “In fact, we are currently involved in R&D to better understand the impacts of multiple retailer’s and processor’s protocols and specifications on production requirements in the agriculture and horticulture sector. In some cases we are concerned that protocols could be requiring producers to adopt environmentally undesirable practices, for example, in relation to irrigation.”
Robinson says producers need to realise that more sustainable techniques could actually benefit their organisations commercially, and this is something some growers have already cottoned on to. “We think there is an increasing awareness and good examples of individual initiatives. However, we believe there is scope for increased sharing and promotion of best environmental practice. In some cases, good practice can save money, and we try and promote these win-win situations,” he says.
Similarly, Boxall says producers should think about the environmental conundrum more creatively. If there is an increasingly “green” consumer-base emerging, being environment-compliant could offer great marketing opportunities, as proven by the LEAF marque, he says. “If you’re a producer, packer, processor, distributor or retailer, small or large, you can purchase LEAF marque produce and add value to your marketing by letting your customers know, or more importantly, by developing new markets that will value produce that has ethics. The LEAF marque is now becoming recognised by many more consumers. Waitrose’s British fruit and vegetables are now all LEAF-marque certified, Fresh and Wild stock LEAF-marque fruit and vegetables, and we’ve had interest from many small retailers, restaurants, food service businesses and processors.”
And with consumers becoming increasingly aware of how food is produced, where it comes from and the potential implications of damaging farming methods, it seems the pressure to start being more conscientious will only intensify.
Supporting this, the government has more legislation up its sleeve. New Nitrate Vulnerable Zone (NVZ) requirements will be the subject of a Defra consultation in the near future and it is part of the Environment Agency’s strategy to continue to explore ways to promote environment-sensitive and responsible farming, according to Robinson. “We think that consumer interest in this area will grow, perhaps stimulated by more general issues such as global warming and water management issues,” he says.
The Environment Agency is also in the process of an Environmental Plan for Dairy Farming, which, if proven successful, will be extended to other sectors. And, according to Robinson, fresh produce could be high on its list.
CALCULATING PACKAGING EFFECTS
Produce Packaging, UK fresh produce packaging supplier and distributor, says producers could help keep tabs on packaging use with its online calculator.
Many producers are obliged to submit waste packaging figures on an annual basis to comply with government legislation, according to the company’s Mark Daisley. He says he saw an opportunity and set about designing a feature on the company’s website, whereby PP customers could calculate their total annual tonnage of packaging in the various materials used in the manufacturing process, as well as the secondary transit packaging. “Although this doesn’t reduce the actual amount of packaging used, it does at least mean that accurate data can be submitted,” Daisley explains. “It also highlights the difference in cost between waste plastic and waste paper, and provides an incentive to use proven biodegradable packaging solutions, such as moulded fibre punnets and pre-pack trays.
PUMPS CUT COSTS
Liquid amplification pumps could help reduce the amount of electricity used in refrigeration and help producers cut costs, according to Farm Refrigeration, a specialist in the design, installation and maintenance of refrigeration equipment.
The environment is affected by the production of electricity and this is a major part of the operation of refrigeration systems used in fruit and vegetable controlled atmosphere and chilled storage, the Kent-based company says.
The careful selection of the equipment used together with its monitoring and control systems can help enormously in reducing electricity consumption - and thus operating costs. As such, Farm Refrigeration always recommends the use of liquid amplification pumps in its systems. John Haffenden, farm managing director, says: “Such pumps can save between 30 and 45 per cent of running costs and have the added benefit of being on the Technology List for the Enhanced Capital Allowance (ECA) and thus qualify for this allowance.”
No comments yet