Ontario's pork industry faces an era of 'accountability and change'

Friday, April 8, 2016

The triple bottom line – environmental, social as well as financial – is becoming a reality for commodity producers and the pork industry is no exception. It also presents an opportunity, says Ontario Pork's chair, 'to tell the good news story of what's happening on the farm and in agriculture'

by DON STONEMAN

If pork producers weren't constantly evaluating the financial bottom line of their operations, they wouldn't still be in business after what has transpired in the last decade. The term 'triple bottom line' might take some getting used to but it means that, in changing times, environmental and social considerations are also priorities, along with financial, in the longer-term future for Ontario's pork production.

Triple bottom line is linked to the concept of sustainability and refers to measurements of an industry, such as primary pork production, based on environmental and social factors as well as financial performance. It seems inevitable that the concept of the triple bottom line will become familiar to most sectors of commercial agriculture in Ontario and Canada in the next few years.

Pork production is at the forefront in measuring sustainability in primary agriculture in Ontario. The 2015 Social Responsibility Report, released at Ontario Pork's annual general meeting in March is the first of its kind in the province. Other commodities and initiatives are moving ahead at varying speeds.

The Canadian Roundtable for Sustainable Beef is being run nationally. Dairy Farmers of Canada is doing a life-cycle analysis of milk production. Egg Farmers of Ontario has sustainability written into its business plan for 2016, but was mum about its initiative at deadline.

The Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA) has a sustainability lead in livestock in the person of Christoph Wand. He notes that many of these efforts are overlapping and interlocking.

Last fall, the commodity-generic Farm, Food and Beyond initiative was launched in Ontario. It involves the Ontario Federation of Agriculture, the Christian Farmers Federation, Farm & Food Care Ontario, the Soil and Crop Improvement Association and the Provision Coalition, which represents food processors. Also part of it is the President's Council, leaders of a diverse group of 37 commodity groups, including Ontario Pork. Even as Ontario Pork is encouraging more producers to take advantage of Environmental Farm Plans (EFPs), the Farm, Food and Beyond initiative says it is "transforming" EFPs into Sustainable Farm and Food plans to take economic and social sustainability into account.

"We are in an era of accountability and change," says Amy Cronin, chair of Ontario Pork. In Cronin's words, social responsibility means "we are listening to what our consumers are saying, to what the retailers are saying, to what government is saying, and it means that we are able to tell our story and be able to benchmark where we are as an industry and be able to put targets in place that will lead to positive change. And at the same time tell the good news story of what's happening on the farm and in agriculture."

Ontario Pork's social responsibility report is a baseline for a number of different measurements and key performance indicators, and making that measurement public is a way for the industry to answer to a seemingly endless list of criticisms by showing where it stands and its intention to make improvements.

Quebec-based Groupe AgÉco prepared the Ontario Pork report, which president Isabelle Charron cautions is just a starting point. "Contributing to changing the way we produce in a more responsible manner is the goal. So behind the report there is an approach that helps in organizing the information and identifying priorities."

It also contributes to mobilizing employees, Charron says. "But, in the end, there is a need to communicate the exercise, the reflections, in a specific and rigorous manner, and to make public commitments."

The benchmarks for this report are based on a survey that 116 producers completed last August. More than 1,000 producers were invited to participate. Charron says a 10.5 per cent response rate is "usual for this type of online survey with producers. We achieved a balanced representation in terms of size and location of farms, which reflects the Ontario pork producers' population."

A similar survey of Quebec pork producers that AGECO conducted earlier achieved a higher response rate: more than 140 producers replied. Charron says the Quebec producer survey was conducted over a longer period of time and Les Éleveurs de porcs du Québec, Ontario Pork's Quebec counterpart, encouraged their producers to participate on several occasions.

The report is auditable, says Jean-Michel Couture, associate and project director for Groupe AGÉCO, which means that the methodology used to produce the report could be reviewed by third parties to see if it conformed to the practices. It does not mean that individual farms would be audited to see if they conformed.

The term 'triple bottom line' was not used in the report, but it is essential to the reporting initiative, Couture says.

Six dimensions of sustainability
While sustainability is often perceived as little more than a marketing ploy, "it is far more multi-faceted than that," says OMAFRA's Christoph Wand.

Ontario Pork's social responsibility report speaks to six dimensions: farm management, economic performance, environmental stewardship, animal care and food safety, relationships with the community and workers' well-being.

The six dimensions are based on internationally recognized methodologies and standards including the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) and the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization's Sustainability Assessment of Food and Agriculture systems (SAFA) guidelines.

From Cronin's point of view, there is definitely a good news story in the 2015 social responsibility report. Of 116 producers who completed that online survey, 85 per cent are enrolled in the Canadian Quality Assurance and Animal Care Assessment programs. Eight of 10 producers have a valid and complete Environmental Farm Plan. Nearly three quarters have a formal nutrient management plan in place. In these three instances, Ontario Pork sees this as an opportunity to improve.

On the business management side, 94 per cent diligently monitor their cost of production and 80 per cent take financial management a step further through a dedicated plan to manage operational risks.

There are places where producers are not as strong. The survey revealed that 59 per cent of producers hire non-family help, either local or offshore workers, but less than half have implemented an Occupational Health and Safety program on their farm. Another shortcoming is that less than 50 per cent of producers have a documented strategic plan that sets short, medium and long-term objectives and identifies future challenges for their farms.

On the environmental side, more than 80 per cent of producers test their soils for nutrient content. Roughly the same number follow legal and professional recommendations when applying pesticides. Between half and 80 per cent test manure for nutrient content before spreading and, again, about the same number of producers relying on wells regularly get their water analyzed. But less than 50 per cent actually have a meter to monitor the use of water in their barns.

As for animal care and food safety, more than 80 per cent claimed to have made changes to their barns, equipment or practices to improve animal care. But less than half have read the new pig code and made changes on their operations.

The social responsibility report commits Ontario Pork to design training programs to educate producers on the Ontario Health and Safety Act, work with producers to increase compliance with the Canadian Quality Assessment and Animal Care Assessment programs, and promote the Environmental Farm Plans.

"Pork producers have to comply with a vast array of provincial and national laws and regulations, but voluntary initiatives to improve performance are what will set the industry apart," the report says.

Thinking positively
Cronin says there may be benefits from this environmental measure which helps the financial bottom line. Measuring water usage, for example, has potential economic advantages. When water use is monitored daily, a decrease in use in a weaner barn can be an indicator of impending illness before clinical signs are exhibited. If water use increases, it can indicate there is a leak in the water system. Cronin agrees with Charron that "there are some groups that will always criticize agriculture. No matter where you move, they will never be satisfied. At the same time, though, you have some really great things happening on the farm and we are going to tell our story about that."

She adds: "I don't think you can start to feel that you are hopeless as an industry. You've got to be positive and continue to work your way through. Change is difficult for a lot of people. We need to have people who can think practically about what can be done to reach common ground and make things better overall."

In the meantime, competition between commodities as to which is more sustainable and which uses fewer resources seems likely to heat up. A Chicken Farmers of Ontario position paper called "The Protein Shift," published in late January, claims that "chicken production is more efficient, more nimble, and allows for greater farming sustainability" than either pork or beef because it consumes fewer resources in terms of land, water, energy, carbon emissions, and land needed to produce a kilogram of meat. Sources cited are from the United States.

A disclaimer at the bottom of a chart proclaiming chicken's advantage states the position paper "is intended to provide information and generate discussions," which it undoubtedly will. BP

Welcome to the language of sustainability
Sustainability has its own language and its own definitions. Sustainability, as a short form for sustainable development, is often defined this way.

Sustainability: "Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."

Social responsibility report: When asked to define what a social responsibility report is, Groupe Ageco's president, Isabelle Charron writes in an email: "Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is the tangible manner to do sustainable development for a company or an organization. Sustainability is a short way to refer to sustainable development, which is a larger macro-concept.

"It means that a company will take into account other criteria than profit in its decision making, by including environmental and social indicators. This approach is also called the 'triple bottom line.'"

Charron says that an organization shouldering corporate social responsibility must address its stakeholders.

Stakeholders: The term "stakeholders" represents "any group or organization that affects or can be affected by or has a deep interest in an organization's actions, positively or negatively."

Charron says that stakeholders in an industry include its critics and you must listen to them. "It does not mean that you have to agree with every critic." But the criticisms have to be evaluated "in a rational and pragmatic manner" based on science.

The data to support the detractors' claims should be examined and an answer given that explains why you agree or not and what changes may be made. Charron cites as an example a vegan person who will always be against farm animals and the idea of eating meat, so she will always criticize the pork industry. The industry can be aware of the criticism and respond by improving animal welfare, based on the codes of practice for the care and handling of farm animals. The codes, Charron notes, are science-based.

The life cycle assessment methodology is compliant with ISO (International Standard Organization) 14040-14044, a highly advanced method of calculating greenhouse gas emissions. BP

Transparency needed in all aspects of food production
Transparency in your operation is key to maintaining confidence to the food industry, says the Center for Food Integrity (CFI), based in Kansas City, Mo., which tracks attitudes towards food over time. It bases this conclusion on three years of research released in late 2015.

"This study shows that consumers look to food manufacturers to provide transparency in all aspects of food production, whether it's safety, impact on health or even on-farm animal wellbeing," says a document available on the CFI website. The full report is available only to members.

"Both positive and negative information must be presented," the CFI website says. "The importance of consumer engagement will only increase as personalized digital communication becomes the dominant way that consumers connect."

Another key part of the social responsibility report is a life cycle assessment of the Ontario pork industry, also using internationally accepted standards (ISO 14040/14044) to assess water use, energy use, greenhouse gas emissions and land use. It encompasses steps from growing crops for feed to processing pork, but does not include distribution or retailing.

Provincially, the Ontario pork industry's carbon footprint amounts to 2.5 million tonnes annually of carbon dioxide and its equivalent gases. The report says that this represents 1.5 per cent of total provincial greenhouse gases emitted, 11 per cent of emissions generated by household automobiles or 22 per cent of emissions from electrical generation in Ontario. The sector consumed 57,116,767 cubic metres of water in 2014 while producing more than 4.96 million animals. The report says that this is equivalent to the amount of water running over Niagara Falls in 6.6 hours.

The conclusion: Ontario is on a par with the North American average on a per kilogram of pork carcass weight and compares favorably with the world average. BP

Benchmarks that define Ontario's pork industry

• 59 per cent of hog farms employ non-family labour, both local and foreign.
• 73 per cent of producers apply manure using injection and low-level broadcast.  
• About 50 per cent incorporate manure into the soil within a day of spreading.
• 86 per cent of producers are engaged in their local community.
• Nearly four in 10 are actively engaged in local service clubs and offer snow removal, lending machinery and providing access to the land. BP