a move to a sustainable supply chain, a win for all. hans muilerman, henriette christensen, pan...

A move to a sustainable supply chain, a win for all.

Hans Muilerman,Henriette Christensen,

PAN Europe

www.pan-europe.info

• 32 not-for-profit members in 19 European countries

• Bring together mainly health, environmental & consumer organizations

• Working to replace use of hazardous pesticides with ecologically sound alternatives

• Goal of productive + sustainable farming (IP), minimizing agrochemical inputs & adverse health & environmental impacts

• Extended network in Brussels (Commission, Parliament, Council) where we successfully lobbied the pesticide package

Who we are & what we do

Food is pleasure and fun

……….. but what about reality?

The PAN-Europe message to you is:

• There is still a big gap between consumer expectations on food growing/food quality and the reality in the supply chain

• We advise you to try to bridge this gap more (we see great opportunities); a real change is needed

• Moving to a higher level of food sustainability could even be more profitable for all in the chain

Examples of a real change can be observed in the market

Reality (1), what about the environment ? (Eurostat 2006)

Reality (2), actual MRL’s exceeding health standards (EFSA opinion 2008)

Active substance Number of MRL’s lowered

Maximum factor lowered MRL

Methomyl 38 50

Methamidophos 3 50

Fenarimol 3 25

Oxydemeton-methyl 7 10

Pirimiphos-methyl 14 100

Procymidon 20 500

Carbendazim 8 5

Fenamiphos 11 5

Ethephon 4 100

Benfuracarb 5 10

Vinclozolin 30 800

Reality (3), low doses unsafe for the unborn (many scientific studies in literature)

• Effect 1: Developmental neurotoxicity:Adverse effects for doses ranging from 0,05-1 ppm (cf. residue detection limit same range)Examples: Chlorpyriphos, Carbaryl, Diazinon, Aldicarb

• Effect 2: Endocrine disruption:Adverse effects for doses ranging from 0,01-1 ppm(cf. residue detection limit same range)Examples: Quinalphos, Trifluralin, ETU/mancozeb

• Effect 3: Combination toxicity:Adverse effects of ppm-range combinedExamples: group Organophosphates, group Triazines, group

Endocrine Disrupting chemicals.

New rounds, new opportunities

• EU decided in 2009 to a system-change in crop production to IPM (pesticide package)

• EU-member states to implement this obligation in 2014 for every farmer through National Action Plans

• Revision CAP-money: could it be connected to IP?• Global GAP discussing implementing IPM in the

certification system• Many retailers adopt own policy on residues and

supple chain management

Supply chain analysis; topics for improvement

FARMERS

TRADERS

RETAILERS

CONSUMERS

Not feeling enough respected for their achievements or not paid enough

Professional skills not fully used(chain management, IP)

Stuck in a never ending price war and having only limited consumer trust

Having the uncomfortable feeling not being in control of the food they are buying;

worries about risks

PAN proposal

• Move to a higher level of performance on IP (Global GAP+) and residues: no price competition with standard products anymore for those retailers choosing to use this higher level of performance;

• Chain leader (retail) to send a clear message to other chain parties: real IP-products will be rewarded;

• Best farmers and best traders for the job identified (dedicated IP-chain)

• Communicate better products to the consumer (and earn more)

• Joint lobby to connect CAP-money to real IP-farmers

How we see this change happen

1. More consumer trust by more sustainable, healthy, residue-free and traceble/regional products

2. Premium products for a higher consumer price

3. Best & innovative retailers take the lead and design real IP-chains, offering IP-products

4. Reward and inspire IP-farmers (respect, pay more, CAP-money)

5. NGO’s could help convincing consumers

On technics change needed:

IP ladderExample potatoes

Step 1: wide crop rotation

Step 2: mechanical weeding

Step 4: use decision-support

Step 3: resistant varieties

Step 7: use plant strenghteners

PHASE I: IP

PHASE II: Residue control, best by prevention

NGO’s could actually help on consumer trust

W H O D O E S P E O P L E T R U S T ?

0 2 0 4 0 6 0 8 0 1 0 0

G o v e rn m e n t

C o m p a n ie s

M e d ia

R e l. o rg a n is a tio n s

T ra d e u n io n s

S c ie n tis ts

D o c to r

E n v iro n m . O rg a n is a tio n s

F rie n d s

F a m ily

P e rc e n ta g e o f p e o p le w h o s a idth e y " o fte n " o r " a lw a ys " tru s te dX to te ll th e m th e tru th a b o u t r is k s( M O R I, c o m m . b y IK E A , 2 0 0 0 ).

Conclusion:

1. Change is possible: Better, healthier and more sustainable products can be put on the market

2. If we help convincing consumers choosing for real IP-products you could get a premium

3. More value for the complete supply chain (and more fun)

4. More trust from society on activities in the supply chain

5. Our CAP-campaign to connect Brussels legislation and money to a sustainable and healthy supply chain is useful for creating IP-chains

Great opportunities out there, but …..

• Who takes the challenge?

– (PAN-Europe is ready for it!)