Corporate Europe Observatory

Exposing the power of corporate lobbying in the EU

  • Dansk
  • NL
  • EN
  • FI
  • FR
  • DE
  • EL
  • IT
  • NO
  • PL
  • PT
  • RO
  • SL
  • ES
  • SV

Audits reveal no benefits from RTRS certification

London/Brussels, 22 May 2012 - The first audit reports of soy companies certified by the Roundtable on Responsible Soya (RTRS) show a failure to achieve any social or environmental benefit, according to a new briefing published today ahead of the RTRS Annual Conference in London. 

The RTRS is a voluntary certification scheme, formally launched in 2006, which has been severely criticised by organisations worldwide. Members include food and agribusiness giants including Cargill, Monsanto and Sainsbury’s, but also some NGO’s including WWF.

Following publication of the first 10 audit reports, GM Freeze, Friends of the Earth and Corporate Europe Observatory [1] have scrutinised the findings, which confirm that there is not one single benefit to RTRS certification. There is no evidence of protection against deforestation, or of reduced use of pesticides. Nor is there any benefit for small farmers in the areas certified.  Some small charitable gestures are taken as evidence of ‘good community relations’, while the reports show that Roundup Ready and other pesticide spraying occurs as close as 30 metres from people’s homes.

The RTRS criteria have been described by campaigners in Europe as being a certifying smoke screen, misleading consumers and not providing any solution to ever expanding soy production. They are demanding that instead of relying on this smokescreen, companies in Europe must find ways to reduce their use of soy for animal feed and biofuels.

Pete Riley of GM Freeze in the UK said:
“RTRS standards do not improve any of the impacts of soy production – to be certified complying with local laws is all that is needed. This means farmers can go on growing genetically modified Roundup Ready soya in a manner that is highly damaging to the soil, environment and local communities. This simply cannot be described as matching the definition of responsible – ‘based on or characterised by good judgement or sound thinking’”.

Nina Holland of Corporate Europe Observatory says:
“European supermarkets should understand that consumers will not be fooled by this RTRS label which is merely greenwash. If they are serious about sustainability, they must develop alternatives to soy animal feed imports.”

The RTRS was accredited last year by the European Commission to certify biofuels to meet the EU 10% biofuel target, but so far none of the reports show that certified soy will be used as biodiesel for the EU market.

The flaws and failings of the RTRS certification scheme include:

  • Weak forest protection measures dating back to just 2009.
  • Certification of unsustainable genetically modified RoundupReady (RR) soya monocultures. RR soy is dependent on glyphosate for weed control which is causing an escalation of pesticide use to cope with weed resistance to glyphosate.
  • Aerial application of glyphosate and other pesticides causing health problems for people living near soya plantations.
  • Poor channels of communication with local farmers and communities
  • Auditing processes which rubber stamp existing mediocre practices.
  • Unsatisfactory ‘mass balance’ traceability which does not provide surety for European consumers about the methods of production used.


For more details about the RTRS and the auditing process please see our briefing, Roundtable on Responsible Soya - the Certifying Smoke Screen.
[ENDS]

Calls to: Pete Riley (GM Freeze) +44 7903 341065
Nina Holland (Corporate Europe Observatory), +31 6 302 85 042
Kirtana Chandrasekaran (Friends of the Earth) +44 20 7566 1669

Notes

1. The Roundtable on Responsible Soya (RTRS) Annual Conference will be held at Park Inn Heathrow Hotel, on the 23rd and 24th May 2011.
To read the full assessment of the first 10 audits by GM Freeze, Friends of the Earth and Corporate Europe Observatory, see:  Roundtable on Responsible Soya - the Certifying Smoke Screen

Related issues: 
 

This week's European Commission decision to extend Glyphosate's market authorisation points to many broader problems - here is a CEO overview of the issues at large.

The official EU assessment of glyphosate was based on unpublished studies owned by industry. Seven months later, the pesticide industry still fights disclosure and, so far, successfully. We obtained a copy of their arguments.

In recent times we have seen various examples of green activists “coming out” as GMO-proponents, arguing that GMOs are safe and have multiple benefits: reduced pesticide use, higher income for farmers, contributing to food security, reduced greenhouse gas emissions... As an essential part of their discourse, organisations that continue to reject GMO technology are depicted as old-fashioned and as acting in contradiction to their own aims.

Mark Lynas is a well known example of this in the UK, with an (in)famous public apology for his past role in the anti-GM movement that drew a lot of media attention. Lynas' move has been copied by others, like blogger Stijn Bruers in Belgium. This framing of the GMO debate has proven quite attractive to the media, even though it is not always clear why specifically these people are seen to have the credentials to merit this attention.

There are many fundamental flaws in the argumentation they are putting forward. Claire Robinson of GMWatch, at the request of Corporate Europe Observatory, has written a rebuttal of many of the claims made by these newly converted GMO proponents. For practical reasons, this rebuttal follows the argumentation and claims made in an article by Bruers on his blog about GMOs .

On 15 June 2016, the Commission will finally announce the long-awaited scientific criteria for EDCs. Time to do a recap of this last season’s main episodes.

A few weeks after the May coup against Dilma Rousseff by conservative parties backed by the country's largest corporations, Brazil's “interim” government, led by Michel Temer, signed an emergency loan to the State of Rio de Janeiro to help finance infrastructure for the 2016 Olympics. The bailout was conditional to selling off the State's public water supply and sanitation company, the Companhia Estadual de Águas e Esgotos (Cedae). 

When we interviewed City Councillor and chair of Rio’s Special Committee on the Water Crisis Renato Cinco, in December 2015, he was already warning against such privatisation threats and provided important background information on the water situation in Rio.

Corporate Europe Observatory's new report 'A spoonful of sugar' illustrates how the sugar lobby undermines existing laws and fights off much-needed measures that are vital for tackling Europe’s looming obesity crisis.

José Manuel Barroso's move to Goldman Sachs has catapulted the EU’s revolving door problem onto the political agenda. It is symbolic of the excessive corporate influence at the highest levels of the EU.

Corporate Europe Observatory, Friends of the Earth and LobbyControl today wrote to Martin Schulz, President of the European Parliament, calling on him to investigate Angelika Nieber MEP over a possible conflict of interest.

 
 
 
 
 
-- placeholder --
 
 
 

The corporate lobby tour